eae 


Seah: =: 
ghereH ee 


stase 
pebess 


: 


SUES Lani 
- ss . ‘7. aeseay bpageeiaiee “4 


bak Dh bepdy tice 


kg 


Soa athiciS® eat ee 
3 seat rt H Re. <4 aig 
$ bf aaa 
> ere Re TS t a5 15a 


ve 


The person charging this material is re- 
sponsible for its return to the library from 
which it was withdrawn on or before the 
Latest Date stamped below. 


Theft, mutilation, and underlining of books 
are reasons for disciplinary action and may 
result in dismissal from the University. 


UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS LIBRARY AT URBANA-CHAMPAIGN 


a 


L161— O-1096 


AN 24 17T PS rt) 


HARPER & BROTHERS, FRANKLIN SQUARE 
1886 


THE STUDENT’S MODERN HVUROPE 


A. HISTORY 


OF 


MODERN EHUROPE 


FROM THE CAPTURE OF CONSTANTINOPLE BY THE 
TURKS TO THE TREATY OF BERLIN, 1878 


BY 


RICHARD LODGE, M.A. 


FELLOW AND TUTOR OF BRAZENOSE COLLEGE, OXFORD 


,. 


NEW YORK 
HARPER & BROTHERS, FRANKLIN SQUARE 
1886 


ane 


ary 


be Neti 


‘vA h sd : 


REMOTE STORAGE 


Abs Ghs tp Es I Be DE Ro ees Ohl ad Bich 


Pi % 
: r% Z " ¢ 


LODGE’S HISTORY OF MODERN EUROPE. 
(Just Ready.) 


WESTCOTT & HORT’S GREEK TEXT OF 
THE NEW TESTAMENT. §1 00. 


MANUAL OF ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 
By Puivie Smiru. Two Parts, Llustrated. 
$1 50 each. 


SKEAT’S ETYMOLOGICAL DICTIONARY. 
#1 25. 


TUE STUDENT'S CLASSICAL DICTION- 
AY. Iilustrated. $1 25. 


ANCIENT ITISTORY OF THE EAST. By 
Puiuip Smit. Illustrated. $1 25. 


WISTORY OF GREECE. By Dr. Witi1am 
SmitH. Illustrated. $1 25. 


COX’S GENERAL HISTORY OF GREECE. 
With Maps. $1 25. 


LIDDELL'S WISTORY OF ROME, Il’d. $1 25. 


MERIVALE’S GENERAL WISTORY OF 
ROME. With Maps. $1 25. 


~12mo, CLOTH, UNIFORM IN STYLE. 


; 


LYELL’S GEOLOGY. Illustrated. $1 25. 


GIBBON’S DECLINE AND FALL OF TIE 
ROMAN EMPIRE, Iilustrated. $1 25. 


HISTORY OF FRANCE. By the Rey. W. H. 
Jervis, M.A. Illustrated. $1 25. 


HUME'S HISTORY OF ENGLAND. Iilus- 


trated. New Edition. $1 50, 
STRICKLAND'S QUEENS OF ENGLAND. 
Illustrated. $1 25. 


WALLAM’S CONSTITUTIONAL HISTORY 
OF ENGLAND, $1 25. 


HALLAM’S MIDDLE AGES, $1 25. 


OLD TESTAMENT IISTORY. By Puivip 


SmitH. With Maps and _ Illustrations. 
$1 25, 

NEW TESTAMENT IISTORY. By Pui.ie 
Smita. With Maps and _ Iilustrations. 
$1 295." 


LEWIS’S IISTORY OF GERMANY. With 
Maps and Illustrations. $1 50, 


THE STUDENT’S SMALLER SEHRIES. 


16mo, Croru. 


SCRIPTURE HISTORY. Illustrated. 60 cents. 
TISTORY OF GREECE. 


cents. 


Illustrated. 60 


HISTORY OF ROME. Illustrated. 60 cents. 


COxX’S SCHOOL HISTORY OF GREECE. 
With Maps. 60-cents. 


IIISTORY OF ENGLAND. Mlustrated. 60 cts. 


ANCIENT IISTORY OF THE EAST. Ius- 
trated. 60 cents. 


SEEMANN’S MYTHOLOGY. Iill’d. 60 cts. 


MERIVALE’S SCHOOL HISTORY OF 
ROME, With Eleven Maps. 15 cents. 


Pusiisnep By HARPER & BROTHERS, New York. 


(GF Any of the above books sent by mail, postage prepaid, to any part of the United States or Canada, 
on receipt of the price. 


p ~s 


PREFACE. 


Tue object of this work is to supply—what undoubtedly 
does not exist at present—a clear, impartial, and at the same 
time, a concise narrative of European history during the 
last four centuries. No attempt has been made to go into 
the details of the domestic history of each state, a task 
which would require as many volumes as there are states. 
Especially the history of England (which has been admir- 
ably treated in Professor Brewer’s recent edition of ‘ The 
Student’s Hume” in this series) has been omitted, except 
so far as it is directly connected with the history of the 
continental states. 

One of the great difficulties has been that of arrange- 
ment. ‘The Author has endeavoured to avoid the baldness 
of a chronological summary, and to group the history of 
the different states round the central current of European 
affairs. This method has necessitated frequent repetitions, 
but it appeared the lesser evil of the two. At the same 
time a full chronological table has been inserted at the 
beginning of the work. 

The Author had prepared a number of genealogical 
tables to illustrate the family relationships which are of 
such importance for a clear understanding of European 
history. But they became so numerous and bulky as the 
work advanced, that it has seemed better to omit, them, and 
to refer the reader to Mr. George’s “ Genealogical Tables ” 
(Second Edition, Oxford, 1875). 

No single work has been taken as the basis of this book, 
and it would be impossible to refer to authorities without 
writing a bibliography of modern European history. The 
Author has spared no pains in consulting the best authors 
on each period, and has endeavoured to elicit the truth by 
a careful comparison of their statements. The amount 
of his success must be left to his readers to estimate. 


Sifat rafter dade faye ud, €& city wah ia saniglcs \ e 7 
gities it de hare aise tif HVE, 7 peak: ) ba taaeon Pie teix » rout aad Sa 
a, ad gutrih Bd Gia E. daoek verge Wa ord atiaie oalrTos 4°, sie. ee 

ay agent wa OF oP este eoeel aera E tepre? ita OVE) a APTIKt tao, THOT sal ‘he 
ae “ ‘ies A: ete ie diviiee Yar Ose L. gata Anis! fj anit 16 al estesty ont aig a4 
oer “ets sie ora oa te ay 8 gPaEELOY x 74 PS oa titpvit : lng be 8 alskur ae mis 
one. ) Hist uf) ty me at a ak pernins ) ae ae v ey ye ‘s t Fe “aftak , eet es a 7 oN 
le wae fe Iie wh dapsoay BT ere yete THRSUOLY OF Steve push Ht he 15 & 
obs, ie. Palsiiito: eth unk ceptor ait at etek Hiebhsts. ot ae 
vaieed te radel toi! tiv: Leeuepaee ehlogttl: xt Vb aa Tak Cate ‘4 
C _ pete Lal staccato, ig = a 


a a “te ie = +s 7+ pie f= 
. ore ths ce ptes"% “ag ef % crt? it feat ent? ter ant ae: ‘S 


sey reals rH ‘ Pe 

i) ' r H ms ' ; aoe ad 

pasemoalriinl ect Sas ce 0: Foose anak 4st eft Anois 
age jd. Gelso TS its, PSIG Aine dssi san) Togotsis.. a fa a ym: 


PR Pee 1 FOIE SS wee Beare. edt: frwrotlify ke a 
ine he as epee dirs ir ui fy enfin vyyit cad inl eid'T -iaBA “ney =" 
Ahicod ik fRe Cee aut ton Bea: teat oe fs jracige at tod 
ba 2h Ti fat Avath Mae bik ole? fegtorlencrilt Aart. w ont 
; : A ath io, t ae 
i ae seis nee a ed le “ore pis, a | Ferenc Aut foal ted 
SO a rarer “ea rate 6 oar e yl ofgvien cx “yf 
pa) meoaest ie To: hineseel vi resiO a, st gone pant. Rent 
ae Be aif) rise TR oe SOE OF, as | godt ahs babil 

. Ge gpd easy: of tebe Fe at yy fesisd., 44 drake Duos et hi ‘= 
7 pita Ie sj hie gaits ry? a oyercds +. 31 of qohoxe. 
\ Here Lalnated bei 
as Pe ne abiedd ait rephid ased bint, Stove oh 


> oe = if aad bef vt , 
ae a sitio fi ine earthrolisra ot pee OF: aidignoa iat oe wih 
oi ehh. ryofon es siya Tebout.to glgargen 
Batali? beer? arta ‘n cert inaitan: i ‘epkt © 2H? 
og biti h act ee G ineghrs Ae 
3 Bice SITUS Cet ah y 
y AAS 

a 


ae, eros 


CONTENTS. 


INTRODUCTION. Z e ; : : 7 7 7 


CHAPTER :T. 
EUROPE IN THE LATTER HALF OF THE FIFTEENTH CENTURY 


CHAPTER II. 
Wars IN ITALY, 1494-1519 . : “ 


CHAPTER III. 
RIVALRY BETWEEN FRANCE AND THE HAPSBURGS—FIRST PERIOD 


CHAPTER IV. 
THE REFORMATION : - ; : 


CHAPTER: V. 
RIVALRY BETWEEN FRANCE AND THE HAPSBURGS—SECOND PERIOD 


CHAPTER VI. 
CHARLES V. AND THE GERMAN REFORMATION. RENEWED WAR 
WITH FRANCE. 1532-1559 : 


CHAPTER VII. 
THE COUNTER-REFORMATION . : ; 


CHAPTER VIII. 


THE REIGN OF PuHiLip IL, AND THE REVOLT OF THE NETHER- 
LANDS . . : § 


; CHAPTER IX. 
FRANCE AND THE WARS OF RELIGION, 1559-1610 


° . 


CHAPTER X. 
GERMANY AFTER CHARLES V., AND THE THIRTY YEARS’ WAR . 


CHAPTER XI. 
FRANCE UNDER RICHELIEU AND MAZARIN 


CHAPTER XIf. 
THE LESSER STATES OF EUROPE IN THE SEVENTEENTH CENTURY 


33 


45 


53 


73 


80 


93 


101 


114 


vl CONTENTS. 


CHAPTER XIII. 
THE AGE or Louris XIV. ;: : . : : 


CHAPTER XIV. 
PETER THE GREAT AND CHARLES XII. . i : - 


CHAPTER wki\e 
FRANCE AFTER THE DEATH OF Louis XIV. . ‘ 


CHAPTER XVI. 
THE REIGN OF THE EMPEROR CHARLES VI. . ‘ : 


CHAPTER XVII. 
PRUSSIA BEFORE THE ACCESSION OF FREDERICK THE GREAT 


CHAPTER XVIII. 
Tue WAR OF THE AUSTRIAN SUCCESSION. 


CHAPTER XIX. 
THE SEVEN YEARS’ WAR : : : ; 


CHAPTER Xo 
EUROPE AFTER THE PEACE OF HUBERTSBURG . 


CHAPTER XXI. 
Tur Reign or Louis XVI. . : ; ae 


CHAPTER XXII. 
Tne FRENCH REVOLUTION s z i 


CHAPTER XXIII. 
THE FRENCH REPUBLIC AND THE EUROPEAN COALITION 


CHAPTERR« XAT. 
EUROPE DURING THE AGE OF NAPOLEON. , 2 


: CHAPTER XXY. 
EUROPE AFTER THE GREAT WAR , . z F 


CHAPTER XXVI, 
REVOLUTION AND REACTION . ; 4 A : _ 


CHAPTER XXVII. 
Tue UNION OF ITALY AND GERMANY % . F 


CHAPTER XXVIII. 
Tur EASTERN QUESTION, 1830-1878 


INDEX . . is ‘ ; < . = ; 


PAGE 
215 


267 


288 


304 


323 


473 


490 


930 


CHRONOLOGICAL TABLE.* 


A.D. PAGE 
1453. Fall of Constantinople... .. Paclitkh atest. 29 
1456. Siege of Belgrad. Death of Tar Haniedes bia hy sk 19 
1457. Death of Ladislaus Postumus of Austria, Tie sind 

Bohemia .._.. eG Baht Sa CLO 
Fall and death of peared Boscauh foie of Venies Seite £3 


1458. Death of Alfonso V. of Aragon, Naples, Sicily, and Bela wee 
Election of Pope Pius II. Cdineas sath OS Va naan Te Piet 

1459. Congressof Mantua... Wy) ee eta) tab eas: yl 

1461. Death of Charles VII. of erage sweclite of Louis XI. ee 22 
Accession of Edward LV. of England. 


1464. Death of Pope Pius II. POT ao ee nth og ag” EO) 

Tissslvot Cosimourde Mediciiia 4.4 er 3, Mage wad obese ld 
TeGoo- War other wpe Weal in. Brancéy so. esis dae, vey Seat, ga ee 
1466. Death of Francesco Sforza of Milan .... a vf 


Treaty of Thorn between Poland and the Teutonic ene aad "7: 

1467. Death of Philip the Good of aR aoe Accession of Charles 
thet Bolte age). et Ges 
1468. Treaty of Perronne ake een Since XI pei Charles Ae Bold oe 
1469. Marriage of Ferdinand of Aragon to Isabella of Castile ..  .. 27 


Accession of Lorenzo the Magnificent in Florence .. .. .. 11 
1470. Temporary restoration of Ilenry VI. in England. 
1471. Election of Pope Sixtus IV. a Ole de Mi Kank ete vy LU 
Death of George Podiebrad of Echourin Fins Ae 


Battles of Barnet and Tewkesbury. Death of aie vi. 
1472. Death of Charles of Guienne, brother of Louis XI... ..  .. 23 
1473. Charles the Bold annexes Guelders .. ..) «1 «2 os «2 28 
1474. Charles the Bold besieges Neuss... .. .. «0 oe we we 28 


Accession of Isabella in Castile .. .. - fi 
1475. Treaty of Pecquigny between Louis XI. std Timasd chee Tae 
1476. Battles of Granson atid Morac o5¢ nat ice fo eice hem nla es Gree 
1477. Death of Charles the Bold .. .. OA 5 tetirs 


‘Marriage of Maximilian to Mary of burscade expt itey, vy lS, 2 


* For the convenience of the reader, some of the chief dates in !nglish History have 
been inserted, even-when no special reference has been made to them in this book. 


vill 


A.D. 


CHRONOLOGICAL TABLE. 


PAGE 
1478. Pazzi Conspiracy in Florence 11 
1479. Treaty of Constantinople between ent és ra the Turks 3 14 
Lodovico Sforza becomes regent in Milan .. 8 
Accession of Ferdinand the Catholic in Aragon he Pe 26 

1480. Capture of Otranto by the Turks kee a er 12, 31 

1481. Death of Mohammed II. . 31 

1482. Treaty of Arras between Louis XI. oad Matimitian 24 
Outbreak of the War of Ferrara in Italy .. 14 

1483. Death of Louis XI. Accession of Charles VIII. 24 
Regency of Anne of Beaujeu in France 25 
Death of Elward 1V. Accession of Edward V. Richard IL, 

1484, The War ot Ferrara ended by the treaty of Bagnolo 14 
Death of Pope Sixtus 1V. ve 14 

1485. Battle of Bosworth. Accession of Cie VIL. in fiRagland 25 
Barons’ War in Naples ry at ves 33 

1492. Fall of Granada : 27 
Death of Lorenzo de Medici 12 
Election of Pope Alexander VI. .. 10 
Discovery of‘America by Columbus. 

1493. Death of the Emperor Frederick III. Accession of Maximilian 20 
Treaty of Senlis between Charles VIII. and Maximilian .. 25 
Treaty of Barcelona between Charles VIII. and Ferdinand of 

Aragon .. Eo Wy Aa, SANTEE Wak Ah Me ae ge 25 

1494. Charles VIII. enter’ Italy nh, ates eae uate Chess 34 
Lodovico Sforza becomes duke of Milan 34 

1495. Expulsion of the Medici from Florence .. .. 1. .. 35 
Charles VIII. conquers ore rab Abie’ Yen ietceiniery 36 
Diet of Worms... Apa PR Tie same yee Sr 20 
Battle of Fornovo SAL st? ee We gd 

1496. Expulsion of the French Foi Naples ae Docye Wee? 2 Geee, 

1498. Death of Charles VIII. Accession of Louis XIL. 38 
Death of Savonarola 43 

1499. Louis XII. conquers Milan .. 39 

1500. Tr eaty of Granada between Louis XII. aft rérditdod 39 
Conquest of Romagna by Cesar Borgia .. 40 

1503. Death of Pope Alexander VI. Election of alia I 40 

1504. The Spaniards drive the French from Naples 39 
Death of Isabella of Castile .. Mee urs ee ae eetes en eee 

1506, Death of the archduke Philip. Ferdinand resumes the govern- 

ment of Castile er dee 

1508. League of Cambray .. .. an ate a ale 41 

1509. The Venetians defeated at Apnaablfet afi oe 0 41 
Accession of Henry VIII, in England. 

1511. The Holy League farmed against Louis XII. ..  .. 4 

1512. The French driven from Italy 42 


Ferdinand annexes Navarre ies ¢ ree Gatasiaee 26, 28, 42 


CHRONOLOGICAL TABLE. 


AD. PAGE 
1512. Death of Bajazet II. Accession ofSelimI, ..  ..  «. 31 
Restoration of the Medici in Florence et 43 

1513. Death of Julius II. Election of Leo X. 42 

1515. Death of Louis XII. Accession of Francis I. Me So 4a 
Death of Ferdinand. Accession of Charles I. of Spain 28 
Battle of Marignano, The French recover Milan 43 

1516. Treaty of Noyon between Charles and Francis .. 44 

1517. Luther attacks indulgences 55 

1519. Death of Maximilian I. a , 91 
Election of Charles V. in the aiaeieas of o 46 

1520. Outbreak of war between Charles V. and Feaiieis I. ; 47 
Death of Selim I. Accession of Solyman the Magnificeht 32 
Luther burns the Pope’s bull 57 

1521. The Diet of Worms .. oe 57 
The French driven from pypete is aire 
Death of Leo X. Election of Adrian VI. .. t. AT 

1523. The Knights’ war in Germany 59 
Death of Adrian VI. Election of Glerrient VIL. 7 
Treachery of the Constable of Bourbon 48 

_ Gustavus Vasa obtains the crown of Sweden 68 

1524, Peasant Rising in Germany 60 

1525. Battle of Pavia. Francis I. a prisoner 49 
End of the Peasants’ war in Germany 61 
Albert of pee ie forms mph, of Prussia indies Polish 

suzerainty aint G00 

1526. Treaty of Madrid haat een Caries v. aa cramcte I 49 
Formation of League against the ones 50 
Diet of Speier in Germany . 62 
Battle of Mohacz. Death of je is sof (ciccas te ad Bahduaia 52, 199 

1527. Sack of Rome by the imperialarmy .. .. .. .- .. 0 
Expulsion of the Medici from Florence 50 
Ferdinand of Austria obtains the crowns of Hnutary and 

Bohemia .... bie. Bl Ql tet o2 
Diet of Westeras. Bsfriastionat in Sedan 69 

1529, Treaty of Barcelona between Charles V. and Glanient Vil. 51 
Treaty. of Cambray between Charles V. and Francis I. 51 
Protest Gh epee... ah as ke ; 63 
First siege of Vienna "St eial to anil .. TL duo’: 199 
Fall of Wolsey in England. 

1530, The Medici restored in Florence .. iy 51 
Confession of Augsburg f 63 
Formation of the League of Sehmalkalde we 63 

1531. Death of Zwingli. Treaty of Cappel . 65 

1532. Treaty of Nuremberg between Charles V. and German Pr otis 

tants .. 64 


1534, 


Death of Clement VIL. iL riectiad of Dual LIL. 


. Truce of Nice. Interview at piiod -Mortes 37h, 
. Charles V. suppresses the liberties of Castile ..  .. ..  .. 76 
. Paul U1. constitutes the Order of the Jesuits .. .. ..  .. 94 
. Disastrous expedition of Charles V. to Algiers... ..  ..  .. 77 


CHRONOLOGICAL TABLE. 


PAGE 

. Charles V.’s expedition to Tunis i PS a! A) 
. Renewal of war between Charles V. and Frankie q. SiS. eae 
Calvin in Geneva aid Geet. bb t ise OF, Se 


. Death of Alessandro de Medici, Wrvestinn of Cosimo (the first 


grand-duke of Tuscany) .. 


Diet of Ratisbon. Attempted religious compromise Se a 
Christian III. of Denmark recognises the independence of Sitedén 185 


. Francis I. renews the war against Charles V. .. .. 0 0. W777 
. Treaty of Crespy between Charles V. and Francis I. Si. a8 
. First. session cf the Council of Trent .. 0% .. b./..0 . 84,96 
. Death of Luther .... PuPTS Staats Mactan TOT N.S 


Outbreak of the Sohinvaticalaié War SPA oS Pat Bee. OS 


. Death of Francis I. Accession of Henry I]... .. .. .. 78 


Defeat of the German Protestants at Muhlberg 5. til FT. ie 
Accession of Edward VI. in England. 


. Charles V, issues the Interim .. PA AR IRROTER, 2  OD 
. Death of Paul III. Election of Tia i. THe Foren! 2. eNOS 
. Second session of the Council of Trent .. .. 87, 96 


2. Treaty of Friedewalde between Henry II. and the Gersit Phinibes 86 


The French obtain Metz, Toul, and Verdun... .. ..  .. .. 87 
Maurice of Saxony attacks patted Viewsat once soe) ee RS. 8G 
Treaty of Passau'.. 3... 0 UMGar., 19 Ytt,, Case 


. Death of Maurice of Saxony at Sikeds Aivosen as, OE OURS: BS 
Accession of Mary Tudor in England, 

. Religious Peace of Augsburg... PES PT SE es 
Death of Julius Il. Election of Paul IV. fRGS ED, PEGs OO 


Charles V. resigns the Netherlands and fealian provinees™ "3. > 90 


JAbdication Of Charles Wy wt) wlatse gee ie Fea h. 7. 90 


Philip IL, king of Spain. Ferdinand I., Emperor .. ..  .. 90 


. Battle of St. Quentin.. RE tise ARO igkes LGF dae Soe OG. 
. the duke of' Guise: captures Galaisieiee) fr t.e) 7 See OT 
. Accession. of Elizabeth .in England 4 oe yay eases O2 


Treaty of Cateau-Cambresis a3 Noe FREE SR, TORT Bn 9D, 
Death of Paul 1V. Election of Pius IV. AU, 2 Gere sr iwe 7. 97 


. Death of Henry Il. Accession of Francis II, of France .. .. 115 


Death of Francis II. Accession of Charles IX. Regency 
of Catharine de Medici .. .. Pa Rah) Ue See c Sank ar 


. Third session of the Council of mich ts Dak Rae Ae ES OE Se ene! 


Massacre of Vassy. Outbreak of religious wars in France .. 118 


3. Murder of the duke of Guise. Peace of Amboise .. .. .. 118 


Close of the Council of ‘Trent. #.u0..ce. os-u as 145) ees 


. Granvella recalled from the Netherlands .. .. .. .. .. 107 


CHRONOLOGICAL TABLE. Xi 


A.D. PAGE 

1564 Death of Ferdinand I. Maximilian Il., Emperor .... 130 

1565. Conference at. Bayonne between Githasute de Medici ai 
Alva “t BM ete e Pe ee ea S” Gace Aaa tL ED 


Death of Pope Bids IV. baie Boe? 65) 0 GAO BRS AB 
1566. Death of Solyman the Meriter, Accession of Selim II. .. 200 

Election of Pope Pinus: Vili ae! shee AY 1 ae PH, 99 
1567. Second religions warin France ..° .. 2...) «es > ae se 119 

Atva, sent tothe Netherlands 0. 0.2) seeor sa FU OR? «108 
1668 sTreaty, of. Longjumieaig hye 4 ee ee PO ee 

Death of Egmont. and: Hortfjile “22 A206) 92 FER as SS, 109 

Outbreak of third religious war A a el MY Yeah Cemetery: lies Pregl 8; 
1569. .Battles'of-Jarnac and Mencontour: .1- 2°89. 8h. 120 
nt 


570. Treaty of St. Germain... .. tee og Mesern © te ok eS PO 

1572. Revolt of the Netherlands beginal ‘ § Eo AN PPS eC ETO 

Electiomol.Pope Gregory XITISPRP, OVI te cert RS 9D 

Massacre-of St. Bartholomew. “.u5 22°88 Sha) Oe INT 

Battle of Lepanto.. .. sae WES AHO? Fp LOL 
Death of Sigismund Anpustes of Poland? Election of Henry 

of Anjou. 2% ° 48 Be [Ete 186 


1573. Fourth religious war omitel sy Edict of Faby Petes} PIS ae, 122 
Recall of-Alva from. the Netherlands .;- .. ©... 2: 4. %.. 110 
Cypras surrendered‘to'the Turks. 12. (ove) W224. 201 

Noysa muere of Leyilet 15+ ean doses ana, eater ehh EO 0 110 
Death of Charles IX. sccession of Henry III. Pe Mie Peni aah EL 

1576. Pacification of Ghent. Don John in the Netherlands ..  .. 111 
Death of Maximilian IJ. Rudolf II., Emperor PFO CeO oe L3e 

1577. Edict of Bergerac in France ea SE SS 8 OUR) SOE Hes Be 

Tore; .Deathioh Don vont Austria’ 290 Atk 8 ee Le 

$570. The Untoniomtieredhtrt 2). 9b Sbpidyys), hints’ ei ele 

1580, Annexation of Portugal to Spain ar tee ee AP De. LOS 

1581. Gebhard Truchsess turns Protestant, and is driven from the 


archbishopric of Cologne s i 133 
1582. Disputes in the German Diet shout the nights of Pracetant 
members).. +. SOM eat Aedes 2.20 Tee. TL 
1584. Assassination of William ‘lie Silent QPrrTy oe beak 
The death of Francis of Anjou makes Henry of eavanes heist to 
the French crown .... ie C200 fe 4th. 12d 
Formation of the Catholic Teaaties in Reade HM. AR 12S 
Death of Iwan the Terrible of Russia cada i Ade es, RY 
1585. Election of Pope Sixtus V. gett PLE eAD se MURREY, Lai, on Cane 
1587. Accession of Sigismund III. in Poland Pe Re MIN et l5, LEG 


Execution of Mary, Queen of Scots. 

1588. Assassination of duke Henry of Guise Saal. biktel CET PRG, oe Lee 
Accession of Christian 1V. of Denmark .. .. .. .. .. 185 
Deteson tue Spanish Armada, ori ays ota ee ee LED 

ios entire: Gotharine de Mediciv ~s0 ovr 28s. die 2. 4 1A 


X1l 


A.D. 


1589. 


1590. 
1592. 


1593. 
1597. 


1598. 


1598- 


1603, 
1604, 


1605. 
1609. 


1610. 


1611, 


1612. 
16153. 
1617. 
1618. 
1619. 


1620. 
1621. 
1623. 


1624. 


1625. 
1626. 


1627 


1628. 
1629. 


CHRONOLOGICAL TABLE. 


PAGE 
Assassination of Henry III. Extinction of the line of Valois. 
Accession of Henry IV. .... oth 009TH.) 2Oee 
Philip II. suppresses the liberties of aves ‘<7 103 
Death of John III. of Sweden. Accession of his son, Bicisnuck 
IIL, of Polanda ss p55 Sipe oie taseeiog: to cipal ABD 
Election of Pope Clement IX, we sah Bee) SOML fo acadtoald. 181 


Henry IV. becomes a Roman Catholic  ... .. -.. «. «. 126 
Clement IX. annexes Ferrara to Papal States .. .. .. .. 181 
Treaty of Vervins between France and Spain .,. .. ... .. .126 


Henry lV. issues the Edict of Nantes... .. Hest 126 
Death of Philip II. of Spain. Accession of Philip IL adiute * lis 
Battle of Stangebro .... off Lanosuisl. to veitind 488 
1613, Great Interregnum in eee us eel eto inns. 6 


Accession of James I. in England. 

Sigismund III. of Poland deposed in Sweden, Accession of 
Charles IX in Sweden .... Evpnisslorniiatl dm i oplacseala. 188 

BlectionsotsPope Paul V.. 2.) ... cea, / aa heeiiek to vekdeee 20d 

Truce between Spainand Holland .. .. ..  «. «. 118,175 

Formation of the Protestant Union in Germany otha... 134 

Disputed succession in Jiilich and Cleve .. .. .. .. «. 184 


Expulsion of the Moriscoes from Spain... heeded. 175 
Assassination of Henry IV. Accession of Ware SIU. Regency 
of Mary de Medicio.. '.45 a.) cing (aay  StepeOh beombes,. doe 
Death of Charles IX. of Sweden. ‘Acoeesiot of Gustavus 
Adolphs fies 924 tl-adoheath. tol te, enapnotion lao 
Death of Rudolf Il. Matthias, Emperor paiae bt Terieet: 135 
Michael Romanof becomes Czar of Russia... i. - 190 


Ferdinand of Styria recognised as Matthias’ heir in Pre ofeach 136 
Rising in Bohemia. Outbreak of the Thirty Years’ War .. 136 


The death of Matthias. Ferdinand IL, Emperor... 137 
The crown of Bohemia accepted the Elector Ralatios, 
Frederiexiys, «35. cap is bea) Lida 
Battle of the White Hill. Brederidk v, fates ox Bahesais 137 
Death of Philip II. of Spain. Accession of Phiind Mops ..° 176 
Frederick V. deprived of his electorate, which. is transferred _ - 
to! Maximilian of Bayariaaa: iw ok he eet tae te- diane oo. 188 
Election‘of Pope Urban. VIII.~ |... “37. putthatyten i odi «. 182 
Richelieu becomes chief minister of France... .. 138, 154 


Accession of Charles I. His marriage with Meant’ Maria.. 155 
Intervention of Christian IV. of Denmark in Germany .. ... 139 
Wallenstein enters the Emperor’s service... .. .. « .. 140 
Battie/ot abutter, |. a3 milicrrmis louciteosrt. 140 
. Richelieu lays siege to La Berhelle olh.o tithe te wobledivequaA» Shop 
Disputed succession in Mantua .. ©... 24), 05) «6 oe 9. 142 
Wallenstein besieges Stralsund gt algae dasongs of4-lo toslatt: 141 


Christian 1V. retires. from the waAtiueth ais surest dle ota ee eee 


CHRONOLOGICAL TABLE. 


AD. 

1629. Ferdinand II. issues the Edict of Restitution 
Treaty of Alais with the Huguenots 

1630, Wallenstein deprived of his command 
Landing of Gustavus Adolphus in Germany 


1631. Settlement of Mantuan succession by treaty of Charases " 


Gustavus Adolphus defeats Tilly at Breitenfeld 
Urban VIII. annexes Urbino to the Papal States 
1632. Successes of Gustavus Adolphus in Germany 
Wallenstein resumes his command 
Death of Gustavus Adolphus at Liitzen 
1634, Assassination of Wallenstein FOR ab 
Battle of Nordlingen .... ee 
1635. War declared between France oa sah 
Treaty of Prague . 


1637. Death of Ferdinand II. Ferdinand III., Emperor 


1638. Conquest of Elsass by Bernhard of Saxe: Weimar 


os eT 
147 


. 148, 176 


148 
148 
149 


1639. Death of Bernhard of Saxe-Weimar. Elsass seized be thei French 149 


1640. Accession of Frederick oW Hliangs the Great Elector, 


Brandenburg 
Rebellions in Catalonia and Dor tapely 
Meeting of the Long Parliament in England. 
1642. Outbreak of the Great Rebellion in England. 
Death of Richelieu. Ministry of Mazarin 
1643. Death of Louis XIII. Accession of Louis XIV. 
Anne of Austria 


1645. Treaty of Brémsebro Se Noha: Sete al fs fae eds 


in 


. 149, 159 
tegency of 


161 
191 


Beginning of the War of Candia between Venice and Turkey .. 202 


1648. Treaty of Westphalia .. 
Rising of Masaniello in Naples 
Accession of the Sultan Mohammed IV. 
1648-1653. War of the Fronde in France 
1649. Execution of Charles I. (Jan. 30). 


. 150 
178 

202 
164-169 


1654. Abdication of Christina of Sweden. Accession of Charles X... 192 


1655. Charles X. of Sweden attacks Poland 


1656. Mohammed Kiuprili becomes Grand Vizier in Duxkey 


1657. Death of Ferdinand HI. Leopold I., Emperor.. 


The Great Elector frees Prussia Sede Polish tebe “5 


Charles X. of Sweden invades Denmark 


1658. Treaty of Roeskilde between Sweden and Deinhar Bik 


Death of Oliver Cromwell. 


1659. Treaty of the Pyrenees between France and “Ligg a! 


s Defeat of Charles X. in the North ty 
1660. Death of Charles X. Accession of Charles XI. 
Treaties of Oliva and Copenhagen 


Frederick III. establishes absolute gov Prsenee in alien ick 


Leopold I. involved in war with the Turks 


193 
. 203 
170 
194 
194 
. 195 


171 
Eileo 
195 
195 
190 
230 


X1V CHRONOLOGICAL TABLE. 


A.D. PAGE 

1660. Restoration of Charles II. in England. 

1661. Death of Mazarin... .. ee 
Louis XIV. assumes the persontl: Stes of Fig gov aramehet 216 

1664. Montecuculi defeats the Turks at St. Gothard .. .. ..  .. 203 
Traucesofevaeyure fark), od quo gary, tee a, We dpe tise, 2204 


1665. Battle of Villa Viciosa. Portugal secures its independence 179, 220 
Death of Philip IV. of Spain. Accession of Charles II. .. 179, 220 


1667, War of Devolution r 20h .-- 228 
1668. Triple Alliance between En biaards “Holland, “and Swites BSN. ae 
Treaty of. Aix-la-Chapélle!'.4, 9) Ag A er PL oy ee, 291 
1669.«Venice cedes Candiato-the Turkstiih iia 1%. whlgeogpgen, .. 4204 
Death of John Casimir of Poland. Extinction of House of 
Jagellon Li ht.. FAS 
1670. Secret treaty of Dover parsed ae and Ragland! la ae 
1671. Ascendancy of Louvois in France eae ee eye ke ee 
1672. French invasion of Holland... .. oo 222 
Murder of John de Witt. William of Grange stadtholder 223 
1672-1676. War between on and. Poland 0499)... .@eiesr A, (204 
1673. French victories .. . TREE hy 2, 224 


League formed at the Hi ague tiga det Tad XIV, At eras S224 
1674. John Sobieski elected king of Poland... .. .. .. ..  .. 198 


French victories... tl? SEU) ere eo -B86 

1675. Rebellion of Hungary andl ‘Tokéli in) Sess ee 207 

Death of Turenne. Retirement of Condé and Mibitesecen: 2227 

Swedish attack on Brandenburg... .. , MEAS a eer 

The Great Elector defeats the Swedes at Fehrbellin .. 197, 325 

1677. William of Orange marries Mary, dau. of James, duke of York 228 

1678, Treaty of Nimwegen  ... 5 .. 226 
1679. Treaty of St. Germain-en- have pal ween’ isenntiod Gusy and 

Sweden ... eR OV SIRE Gt 20, SHAD WIAG, S25 

1681. Louis XIV. seizes Siehicee: a8 S09t, PRS oy Coe sees 

1682 Accession of Peter the Great in Russia .. .. .. .. « 199 

1683. Death of Colbert . f, Ne Cisse tin th ae wheres eooe 


Siege of Vienna ee the Turks Ati s ols ARROWS) ade: Dt Re eS 
Vienna relieved ‘by John Sobieski... .. 9... 92. 08 ... 209 
1685. Accession of James II. in England. 


Revocation of the Edict of Nantes .. as gor 
1686. Formation of the League of Augsburg Raines Hontd ‘XIV, ~. 237 
Suppression of the Hungarian revolt ofiraanyik er ¥eR92 T1284 t 
1687. Deposition of Mohammed IV. Accession of Saipan II. ‘aes | 
1688. Death of the Great Elector of Brandenburg ..  ..  .. «. 327 
Revolution in England. Accession of William III. wera trie 3") 


1689. General European War CY Mik Re RC eeb A Che ORS Cae 

The .Jmperialists ‘take Belgnadec ite.) Nice grist) Ts. eal bacg Be. 253 
1690.. Battle of therBoyne «sive alalomagenter Aetew Li otbitoles Ge 2280 
1691. Death of Solyman Il. Accession of Achmet Il...) ..) .. 218 


A.D. 


1691. 
1692. 
1694. 
1696. 
1697. 


1698. 
1699. 


1700. 


1711. 


1712, 


. Outbreak of the war in Italy 


9. Death of William III. Accession of Anne.. 


CHRONOLOGICAL TABLE. 


Leopold I. annexes Transylvania 

Battle of Steinkirk 

The Turks recover Belgrad.. su % 
Victor Amadeus of Savoy receives Piner ae al ‘Caaale A 
Treaty of Ryswick 

Eugene defeats the Turks a Pints 


Death of Charles XI. of Sweden. Accession of Charles XII. .. 
Death of John Sobieski of Poland. Election of aaa A be 


of Saxony. 


First treaty of Bowen (of the Spanish eter b 
Treaty of Carlowitz 


League between Russia, Poland, “aud Penang nae Secs 


Second treaty of Partition .. 
Death of Charles II. of Spain 


Louis XIV. accepts the Spanish crown or his panache Philip 
pay. Ys 
ars 
eke 
-. 250 
.. 248 
Lo) S27 
.. 249 
. 272 
. 253 


of Anjou (Philip V.) SSRRIAN TA PLATS OZ: 
Charles XII. defeats the Danes. Treaty of Travendahl .. 
Charles XII. defeats the Russians at Narwa 
Formation of the Grand Alliance 
Kingdom of Prussia established by Vrederick D: 


Charles XII. invades Poland 


. Battle of Blenheim 


Capture of Gibraltar by Sir adie Rooke 


Deposition of Augustus If. Stanislaus Leczinski line of Poland 
5. Death of Leopold J. Joseph I., Emperor .. 
. Battle of Ramillies Za 


72 


(a 


255 
274 


. 253 


250 


Archduke enters Madrid and is padcinlaced ‘eter as Charles IIT. 254 


Philip V. recovers Madrid . ; 
Charles XII. enters Saxony aiid encamps at Atraubtadt! 


. The duke of Berwick defeats the allies at Almanza 
. Battle of Oudenarde 

. Charles XII. invades Russia 

. Battle of Malplaquet .. 


Defeat of Charles XII. at Paltawe 


. Congress of Gertruydenburg 


Vendome defeats the allies at Brihuega and Villa Viciosa 
Fall of the Whig ministry in England 

The Turks declare war against Russia 

Death of Joseph I. Charles VI., Emperor 

Marlborough deprived of his command 

Death of the Dauphin of France... 

Peter the Great forced to conclude the fokty of the Pr uth 
Victory of Villars at Denain jae Fi 


. 255 
. 274 
.. 255 
Prey iy | 
.. 276 
Le 208 
we Zhe 
.. 258 
The archduke Charles recovers Madrid, but is again fechatted is 


259 


. 209 
aoe 
iu to 
sas aod 

. 259 


254 


. 279 
. 260 


xvi 


A.D. 


1712. 
1713, 


1714. 


CHRONOLOGICAL TABLE. 


PAGE 
Death of the duke and duchess of Burgundy .. ..  .. «. 264 
Peace of Utrecht 5) 84 Ste Arve ave. Hees. BE ese: AU 
Death of Fred. I. of Prussia. Accession of Fred. William J... 327 


Treatiessof Rastadovand Badew O22" “YE es Jo aeons gk tpt) 4 OST 
Accession. of George I. in England) ... ..2 °° ./9 Uotl. 265 
Death of the duke of Berry a et STE. 2G 


Charles XII. leaves Turkey and veut +b ‘Sw dient v4. 279 
Philip V. of Spain marries Elizabeth Farnese of Parise HPO, 296 
Outbreak of war between Turkey and Venice .. .. .. «. 305 


: Death of Lowis thie doje. 90) oe Ty Eg; eS 


Accession of Louis XV. Regency ‘of Orient ob RCOIZSD, ous 
Charles VI. supports Venice against the Turks Pe HORS, 0D 


9.. Eugene defeats the Turks at Peterwardein .. -.. .. .. 306 
. Triple alliance of France, England, and Holland .. ..  .. 298 


Spanish conquest of Sardinia ae ROFL Td le HR 09 
Eugene defeats the Turks at alpen 3 pietibg ) tary Ee 0G 


1718, Turkish war ended by treaty of Passarowitz ..... .. 4. 306 
Spanish conquest of Sicily ..  ... 299 
Quadruple Alliance of hone Aci aglaw ahi Holland. 300 
Chimerical schemes of Alberoniand Gérz..  .... . 281, 300 
Conspiracy of Cellamare in France .. i. «2 «. «. «- 300 
Death of Charles Xlljof.Swedenion i.» J meal al ate. 2282 

1719, Accession of Ulrica Eleanor in Sweden. Establishment of 

oligarchical government... ..  .. vl INS, . ABS 
French invasion of Spain. ree of ‘Alberti oh. oety nt... 301 

1720. Settlement of the northern wars LBusesr tikes. 283 

Victor Amadeus III. cedes Sicily to vee aa receives 
BLOIRIA vier, 6 Mat to si) teke, ARE 

Charles VI. publishes bie Peagehatie Sastetiout Teh. 108 

Collapse of Law’s financial schemes in France .. .. .. «. 294 

1722. Charles VI. founds the Ostend Company .. .. 309 

1723. End of the Regency in France. Deaths of Duibsis nik Obed 302 

1724. Ripperda’s schemes. His mission to Vienna .. .. ..  .. S11 

1725. Death of Peter the Great. Accession of Catharine I. Vat). ABE 


1728. 


Louis XV, marries, Marje Leczingka -.. deupeiinli to olitatt. #202 
Treaty of Vienna between Austria and Spain .. ..  ..  .. 311 
League of Hanover between England, France, and eee >. 312 


. Fleury becomes chief minister of France ... .. .. «. 4. 303 
Disgrace of Ripperda: sesigsyT 24 pot Y ohh Rha emcee. 013 
Frederick William I. of Prussia deserts the League of 

“Henover .).) te s sauibash aaa. sR eseO0 


. A Spanish fleet favs vee to ‘Gibraltar so) daneok. te denome, Sse 


Charles VI. draws up the treaty of Vienna .. .. .. .. 314 
Accession of George II. in England, 

Death of Catharine J. Accession of Peter II. in Russia .. .. 286 
Philip V. signs the convention of the Pardo .. .. ..  «. 34 


CHRONOLOGICAL TABLE. xvii 


A.D. 
1729. Treaty of Seville between England, Bivdeive and Spain 


1751. Second treaty of Vienna. Don Carlos receives the duchy of 


PAGE 


. 314 
1730. Death of Peter II. Accession of Anne of Gas Meni: p .. 286, 


287 


Parma oatolp 

1733.. Death of ere Ih of Saxony? dea Poland ee Na: 
1733-5. War of the Polish Succession.. bd si laden 816-320 
1733, Stanislaus Leczinski elected king, but pidied by the Russians 316 
Accession of Augustus III. in Poland.. & OLG 


France allied with Spain and Sardinia against Austria rust; 
Family Compact (secret) between France and Spain 
1734. Don Carlos conquers atts Indecisive campaign on the 
Rhine = onath tatoiry in naive f. 
1735. Spanish conquest oh Sicily; Charles VI. accepts the prelimi- 
naries of peace. Don Carlos keeps Naples and Sicily and 
resigns Parma to the emperor a 
Lorraine given to Stanislaus Leczinski .... 
1736. Russia declares war against Turkey .. 
Death of Prince Eugene... gd lip no's 
1737, Austria joins Russia against the Turks ae 
1738. Preliminaries of 1735 confirmed in the third Neti of Vienna. 


France guarantees the Pragmatic Sanction... .. 1.) 4. 

1739. Treaty of Belgrad between Austria and Turkey F 
Treaty between Russia and Turkey .. ..  «.  .. 

War of Jenkins’ ear between France and Spain i phat Be 


1740. Death of Frederick William I. of Prussia. Accession of 


318 


. 336 


. 318 


©2 G2 OG Od 
bo bp 
bo re 


oo 
J 


Frederick the Great d eercedece HL 4 337 
Death of Anne of Russia. Accession of Iwan VI. 386 
Death of Charles VI. Accession of Maria Theresa .. 338 
Claims, to-the Austrian succession” 0... .«y%)% 339 
1740-8. War of the Austrian succession ag Sag haey ai one assy B42-386 
1740. Prussian invasion of Silesia Gibvieted MA AAT Rep . 342 
1741. Battle of Mollwitz i ee shinee 343 
Formation of league against Was Ticrea dam lies 345 
Convention of Klein Schnellendorf 347 
Capture of Prague by French and Bavarians 348 
Deposition of Iwan VI. Accession of Elizabeth in Pain 388 
Frederick breaks the convention of Klein Schnellendorf .. 348 

Death of Ulrica Eleanor of Sweden. Accession of her husband 
Frederick .. 389 
1742. Election of the Reser Charles VI. 349 
Conquest of Bavaria by the Austrians 349 
Failure of Prussian campaign in Moravia .. 349 
Battle of Chotusitz 350 


Preliminaries of Breslau and featy of Paahis Betws een Raat 
and Prussia ; 
Treaty of Dresden ney: een Austen ia aa ee 


XVlli CHRONOLOGICAL TABLE. 


A.D. PAGE 
1742. The Austrians driven from Bavaria .. ..) 1. .. .. ....352 
Capitulation of French garrison in Prague... .. .. .. 353 
Indecisive#ampaignin italy «fh fees vaseldgo) Leo 40.858 
1743. Death of Cardinal Fleury .... fF oat oes Mee te oer Oo 
Bavaria reconquered by the anstrihe Convention of Nieder- 
schonteld cee...) ene 2. COREE, Ged UP Me Ve ee 
Battle of Dethiieen als: mitt, JBgo 
Treaty of Worms between Edblamt Neate atl Sardinia .. 309 
Treaty of Fontainebleau between France and Spain.. .. .. 360 
Treaty of Abo between Russia and Sweden .. .. sw. Sw. 8389 
1744. Successes of Marshal Saxe in the Netherlands .. .. .. .. 361 
Austrian invasion of Alsace “ ’ vi ODE 
Fredk. the Great allies himself with Reatic’ tte renews the war 363 
Prussian invasion of Bohemia and capture of Prague .. .. 364 
indecisive‘campaign’in Italy VC 84 003 8? BG ee sees |... B66 
Retreat of the Austrians from Alsace 4 Se POEAE HE BES 
Traun manceuvres the Prussians out of Bohétiia LAD RASS, WS8B 
The Austrians again driven from Bavaria.. >. 366 
1745. Death of the Emperor Charles VII. NaoumNion of ‘Mascichilian 
Joseph in Bavaria.. & Bhat RS IS ey ee 
Treaty of Fiissen between Adsteia hd Marea BTIAS Si). SOM yee 
Renewal of the alliance between Austria and Sdeony se S. AOS 
Victory of Marshal Saxe at Fontenoy fel GONG See as Ob 
Austrian invasion of Silesia 5 PP SAE A eS ele: SERS SED 
Battle of Hohenfriedberg .. ... RSet. Jara) 
Convention of Hanover between Ragland a Proatia A 371 
Francis of Tuscany, husband of Maria Theresa, elected Badpetor 
assFrancied Fie 3. 8 RO ARPA LY Olay ee Geese OTe 
Battle of Soor "V6" seh aR BG, PS AS, OP SCRA Te 
Prussian invasion of Saxony OES 373 
Treaties of Dresden between Prussia and tA untri ia, dea peaee 
and Saxony... 5” ahh cue 5 RET a es UP Ran ROE: 
Austrian disasters in Italy en OE, Se PRSRE Th UARMETS, B76 
Negotiations between Sardinia and Birsinge ooo OEP BANE or 7 
1746. -Austrian ‘successes in Italy /.°% (2°45. “0. UE: 1 SSeS, O78 


Death of Philip V. of Spain. Accession of Ferdinand VI. .. 378 
French successes in the Netherlands. Battle of Raucoux 379, 380 


Futile attack upon Toulon .... ir Qe A a aie oh Set} 

1747. French invasion of Holland. . William IV. becomes Stadtholder 382 

Victory of Marshal Saxe at Lauffeld .. 2.) 2. ww wes. 382 

Failure of the Austrian attack on Gehon eet Peek. Ie 382 
Elizabeth of Russia quarrels with Frederick the Great una 

allies herself with Austria... .. Jo % 5 Rep 

1748. Treaty of Aix-la-Chapelle ends war of ueihay succession .. 384 

Don Philip receives the duchy of Parma .. .. .. www. 385 


1750. -Mission of Kaunitz to Versailles. oF). OS. 9. a ee, B04 


CHRONOLOGICAL TABLE. Xix 
A.D. PAGE 
1752. Treaty of Aranjuez between Austria and the Bourbon states .. 395 
1753. Kaunitz becomes chief minister in Austria inks 28o0:? 
1754. Outbreak of war between English and French in Arpeei okout 
1755. Treaty of St. Petersburg between England and Russia . 398 
1756. Convention of Westminster between England and Prussia « 399 
French conquest of Minorca... Pe .. 400 
War declared between England and francs .. 400 
Treaty of Versailles between France and Austria .. 402 
Frederick the Great invades Saxony ..  .. 4. oe we Swe 404 
Battle of Lobositz : : ‘ . 406 
Capitulation of the Saxon army at Pir na., Pr eae: 406 
1756-1763. Seven Years’ War... a AV IEA as 400-429 
1757. Russia accepts the treaty of Versailles :. -- 407 
Attempted assassination of Louis XV. by Damiens . .. 409 
Second treaty of Versailles... .. ..  «. . 409 
Ministry of William Pitt in England.. .. 414 
Prussian invasion of Bohemia. Battle of Pragué .. 411 
Defeat of Frederick at Kolin , Pe pe A Tk he Bee i | 
Clive’s victory at Plassy. Foundation of English empire in 
India.. eee .. 418 
Convention of Cheatdt-Gavet bay .. 412 
Frederick’s victory at Rossbich . . 413 
Fredérick’s victory at Leuthen .. 414 
1758. Ferdinand of Brunswick drives the French Fao North Ger many 415 
Failure of Prussian invasion of Moravia .. 416 
Battle of Zorndorf Ar .. 417 
Defeat of Frederick at Hochkireh 417 
Choiseul becomes minister in France .. $i 420 
Renewal of alliance between Austria and France 420 
1759. Battle of Minden... .. » ahiey 422 
Defeat of Frederick at Katha sdorf 422 
Naval victories of England . 423 
Capture of Quebec. Deaths ‘of Wolfe andl Monécalen’ ... 423 
Death of Ferdinand VI. of Spain. Accession of Charles III. .. 423 
Pombal expels the Jesuits from Portugal . 436 
Capitulation of Maxen.. ; 422 
1760. Schuwalow treaty between nee se Russie 423 
Victories of Frederick at Liegnitz and Torgau.. .. 424 
Death of George II. Accession of George LI. 425 
1761. Resignation of William Pitt , 426 
1762. War declared between England and Salas 426 
Death of Elizabeth of Russia. Accession of Peter ne 427 
Alliance between Russia and Prussia . # 427 
Deposition of Peter III. Accession of Catharina ie 427 
Neutrality of Russia : 427 
1763, Treaty of Paris between England, Fra ance arid Senin 427 


CHRONOLOGICAL TABLE. 


. Treaty of Hubertsburg between Austria and Prussia 


Death of Augustus III. of Saxony and Poland ...., 


. Abolition of the Jesuits in France 


Stanislaus Poniatowski elected king of Pélana-4 


9. Death of Francis I. Joseph II., Emperor .. 
. Death of Stanislaus esiak | Annexation of Dodedie 


France .. 


. Expulsion of the isukts Foon he fe 
. Corsica sold by Genoa to France .. ROOTED, GED 
. Death of Clement XII, Election of Clement XIV... 


Outbreak of war between Russia and Turkey . 
First interview between Frederick the Great cat Fone IL 


. Fall of Choiseul 


Second interview between Rrededi@h the Geese mand Boweyih a 


. Abolition of the Parliament of Paris by Maupeou 
. First Partition of Poland 


Gustavus III. restores absolutism in Sate tne 


. Clement XIV. suppresses the Jesuits.. 
. Death of Louis XV. Accession of Louis XVI. 


Ministry of Maurepas .. 
Treaty of Kutschuk Kainardji cae een jp Racioid find Thinkers 
Restoration of the Parliament of Paris ..  .. 


. Reforms of Turgot in France esd ED. ELOISE F's SNE: 
». Dismissal of Turgot ..  .. St re teiatten ty) Duo 


Necker becomes Financial Minister 
Declaration of American Independence 


. Death of Maximilian Joseph of Bavaria. Claims of Joseph IL. 


to Bavarian succession 


. Frederick the Great opposes Joke gh I. in Bapiidin 21089, 


Treaty between France and the American Colonies .. 


1779. Settlement of Bavarian succession by treaty of Teschen .. 
Spain joins France against England .. .... 
1780. Death of Maria Theresa... all. anigy 


cs Armed Neutrality ” of the North 


- Alliance between Catharine II. and Joseph II. 


Resignation of Necker... 
Death of Maurepas } 
Surrender of Cornwallis at YWewetsdede Piva. Tt 


. Fall of Lord North’s ministry in England.. 
. The Crimea ceded to Russia a! ey 


PAGE 
-s 428 
~» 442 
.. 436 
» 443 
438 
- 
.—409 
.. 436 
o- 433 
SUA ST 
. 446 


. 447 


. 433 
447 
.. 433 
.. 448 
. 463 
.. 437 
.. 434 
. 476 
. 449 


oo 477 


. 478 


. 480 


. 480 
. 481 


» 451 


.. 451 
. 482 


. 452 
. 483 


.. 452 
-» 483 
.. 406 
..° 485 
.. 485 

. 486 


. 486 
. 456 


Treaty of Versailles. Recognition of i nieridacd Tndepentence | 486 


Ministry of Calonne in France 


. Frederick the Great forms the Fitrstenbund apainst dceopii I 
. Death of Fredk, the Great. Accession of Fredk. William II. 
. Meeting of the Notables in France. Fall of Calonne 


Fredk. Wm. II. of Prussia restores William V. in Holland 


487 
458 
458 

.. 488 
. 461 


1790. 


1791. 


1792. 


1793. 


CHRONOLOGICAL TABLE. 


Outbreak of war between Russia and Turkey .. 


. Joseph II. joins Russia against the Turks . , 
Treaty of the Hague between Prussia, England and Holland bi 
». 463 
Louis XVI. recalls Necker and summons the ae Sigal “a 
. Meeting of the States-General (May 5) 


Gustavus III. of Sweden attacks Russia 


Assumption of the name of National Assembly (Fane 1) 
Dismissal of Necker (July 11) ..  ..).. 

Storming of the Bastille (July 14) 

Recall of Necker . P 

The abolition of feudal riehis éineget se 

Riot at Versailles (Oct. 5). The king in Paris (Oct. 6) 
Death of Abdul Hamid. Accession of Selim III. ; 
Death of Joseph II. (Feb. 20). Leopold Il., Emperor 


XXi 


PAGE 


.. 461 
. 461 


461 


489 


-0 £02 
.. 492 
.. 496 
. 497 
.. 498 
. 500 
. 505 
.. 4623 
.. 464 
The assembly draws up a new constitution for France .. 507- 


511 


Reform of the Polish Constitution (May 3) 467 
Treaty of Reichenbach between Austria and Prussia aly %) 466 
Resignation of Necker .. . i 513 
Treaty of Werela between ae and Siveden re 463 
Death of Mirabeau (March 27) rid do ety: 513 
Louis XVI.’s attempt to escape (June 20). ee failure .. 514 
Conference of Pilnitz .. 518 
Louis XVI. accepts the causa (Santeinbad 14). 516 
Dissolution of the Constituent Assembly (Sept. 30) 516 
Treaty of Sistowa between Austria and Turkey 466 
Meeting of the Legislative Assembly (Oct. 1) .. 519 
Treaty of Jassy between Russia and Turkey 466 
Russian invasion of Poland... goled to seisieond SentT .,t469 
Death of Leopold II.(March1).. .. «wer roan 468, 522 
Death of Gustavus HI. of Saat (March 29) . 523 
France declares war against Austria (April 20) 523 
Riot in the Tuileries (June 20)... .. 524 
Francis II. elected Emperor (July 3).. ’ 524 
Manifesto of the duke of Brunswick (July 27),., ». 525 
Great riot in Paris (August 10). Suspension and imprison- 
ment of the king: pao xy) a . 926 
September massacres .. as sree bei - 527 
Cannonade of Valmy (Sept. 20).  Rasenad of the Prussians .. 528 
Meeting of the Convention (Sept. 21) " 529 
The French Republic. Beginning of the year I. Set. 21). 531 
Annexation of Savoy and Nice to France .. bd. desk Ooo 
Successes of Custine in Germany 534 
Battle of Jemmappes (Nov. 6). ged conquers sibel Oui 534 
Trial of Louis XVI. by the Convention (Dec. 13-26) ., 536 
Execution of Louis XVI. (Jan. 21) ital) “Sn elt 537 
Second Partition of Poland (Jan. 23)... ..  .. 409 


Xxil 
A.D. 
1793. 


1794. 


1795. 


1796, 


CHRONOLOGICAL TABLE. 


PAGE 
France declares war against England (Feb. 8).. .. .. .. 538 
Defeat of Dumouriez at Neerwinden (March 8). Failure of his 

SCH CMDs MRRG MERWE ae PRP Se ag, lS ee ns “ws pe Oe 
Rising in La Vendée... .. 939 
Appointment of the Coatniities af Public Safety (april 6) .. 540 
Fall of the Girondists (June 2) . he 541 


Re-organisation of the Odimnnittes of Public’ Safety, ‘Wniak 
becomes mlsalabe yk Ae Re wee ons oe eee 
Suppression of provincial rhvelts at a Sal ee aU ee 
Frenth wietories.; 2-7 p seu. Fe Ia ce ie ane oye KEP 
The Reign of Lerrorie eee ay yy wore es hee ne, ee oe ee 
The “dumb sitting ” of Grodno (Sept. 22) .. .. ..  .. 470 
Introduction of the republican calendar (Oct. 6) ..  ..  .. 545 
The *' Keast ofiReason "AGN Ovy1@) re aa ee nee ee OLD 
Fallief the: Hebsrtists:(March toy) 2.0 Fons, OS. Se edb 
¥allipfithe Dantonists (ApraiByeee ey ee es ee 
Supremacy of Robespierre Singh rst Wage Sere ES, 
Treaty of the Hague between England ait i Wssi@— ea es POOU 
Revolt of Kosciusketin Poland i", foe". a.) nee ee oe eel 
Failure of Prussian invasion of Poland Baie GA AS oe Bei 
The “ Festival of the Supreme Being” (June) .. .. ..  .. 547 
Death of Robespierre:(Jaly:28) 5°. oot) vee ene eet Oe 


The Russians put down the Polish revolt ..  .. .. ..  «. 471 
Thermidorian reaction in France be a ly: ee era ee OU 
Closing of the Jacobin club by SPD OSs RE eer. OO 
French victories ... yar omelet Ett Oa 550-1 


French conquest of Holland FF ee dae hee oy te tee» Soe L 
Chird Partition of Poland (Jando nec ae ae) ee eee 


Break up of the European coalition .... pier emg gaee SIF 
Treaty of Basel between Prussia and France » (April 551 
Treaty between Spain and France (June) . PrN pet ot ae OL 
Death. .Louis KV IES IuneG) Si or Pee es Fe” Oe OL 
Suppression of the revolt in La Vendée .. .. .«. «. = «. 552 
French constitution of'the’year Ill... Se 552 
Suppression of rising of 13 Vendémiaire .. .. ..  «.  «. 553 
Dissolution of the Convention (Oct. 26) .. .. «2 3. «(558 
The Directory .. Heh ak) SAEED, Cet oie ey oe ame Sa 
Campaign on the Rhine pastvite Act Sn 2 na) et ne BPR Wah? 
Bonaparte’s invasion of Italy .... Dy ath Ow 
Victor Amadeus III. of Sardinia Mancina hich atti peace.. 555 
Battle of Lodi (May 9). Conquest of Lombardy... 556 
Successes of the archduke Charles in Germany. Defeat of 
Jourdan and retreat of Moreau-..  .. ww ewe we «ODT 
Battle of Arcola (Nov. 15-17) .... ; 558 


Death of Catharine II. of Russia (Nov. 17). Nees of 
Paul J.- fw note tone TRE At co eee ee 2 


A.D. 


1797. 


1798. 


1799. 


1800. 


1801. 


_ 1802. 


1803. 


1804. 


CHRONOLOGICAL TABLE. 


Battle of Rivoli (Jan. 15) . 
Surrender of Mantua (Feb. 2) 


Bonaparte concludes treaty of Tolentino ane Hoon (Fe 19). 


French invasion of Austria .. 
Preliminaries of Leoben (April 18) 
Submission of Venice ..  . 

Coup d’éiat of the 18th Frnatidag (Sept. 4) 


XX 


Treaty of Campo Formio (Oct. 17). Venice ceded to Jomtaite 


Congress of Rastadt 


The French enter Rome, expel Pine VIL, and shoubate a seuntlic 


Bonaparte’s expedition to Egypt ee 
Switzerland becomes the Helvetic Republic 
Second coalition against France 


Naples, Sardinia and Tuscany occupied by ‘is Fr seh 


French defeats in Germany and Italy OM 
Restoration of Ferdinand IV. in Naples 
Bonaparte’s return from Egypt (Oct. 9) 

Coup @’ état of the 18th Brumaire (Nov. 9) 
Constitution of the year VIII. ‘% 
Bonaparte First Consul rr 
Campaign in Italy me anc 34 2a Die BS 
Battle of Marengo (June 14) CHS Bus edet 25 
Moreau’s campaign in Germany 

Battle of Hohenlinden ; 

Paul I. renews the Armed 04 tralian 

Treaty of Lunéville between France and Austria 
Resignation of William Pitt 

Nelson bombards Copenhagen 

Assassination of Paul I. Accession of Paul Il. 


Capitulation of the French forces in Cairo and Alexandria 
Preliminaries of peace between England ang France (Oct. 1) 


The Batavian Republic 
The Italian Republic 


Treaty of Amiens between Pavia oa Fr rance aehiea a7) . 


Bonaparte’s concordat with the Pope 

Bonaparte Consul for life (August) .. 

Increase of despotism in France .. 

Annexation of Piedmont to France (Sept.). 
Secularisation of ecclesiastical states in Germany 


Renewal of the war between England and France .. 


French occupation of Hanover .. 

Issue of the Code Napolém 7 

Murder of the duke of Enghien (March 15) 
Bonaparte proclaimed Emperor as Napoleon I. 
William Pitt resumes office 


PAGE 

. 508 

558 

558 

pelt. SOF 
ees 559 
.- 060 

. o61 

562 

563 

564 

e. 063 

. .. 064 
.. 064 

: . 965 
ase OGD 
Aria ey 0OB 
-. 968 
LOGS 

2s 069 

.. O70 

. O74 
Leap... aio 
«. 075, 576 
Loc 576 

Si is 

. o76 

ae rs 

vay ORE 

a SCE 

- O18 

578 

. O81 

581 

578 

.- 980 

a Ook 

eee, oye 
.. O81 

{Gy 

-» 083 

.. 383 

.. 080 

. O84 

. 585 

586 


Francis IL. assumes the title of “ ercdians ei pes or” staf Anetiia 586 


2 


XX1V 
A sDi 


1805. 


1806. 


1807. 


1808. 


1809. 


CHRONOLOGICAL TABLE. 


Establishment of the “ kingdom of Italy ” vo Lo eae 

Formation of the third coalition against France 

Napoleon marches against Austria 

Capitulation of Ulm (Oct. 20) 

Battle of Trafalgar. Death of Nelson (Oct. 2) 

Prussia joins the coalition (Nov. 3) 5 

Battle of Austerlitz (Dec. 2) 

Treaty of Schénbrunn between France an Prasat (Dea. ‘BY>. 

Treaty of Pressburg between France and Austria 

Death of Pitt (Jan. 23) I GUND cAaaes. OE. 

Ferdinand IV. driven from Naples Rioxtph Bonaparte pro- 
claimed king .. ats Ot Shyrins heervensl ye. 

Louis Bonaparte king of Holland 

The Confederation of the Rhine (July 12) 

End of the “ Holy Roman Empire ” (Aug. 1) 

Prussia declares war against France (Oct. 9) .. 

Battles of Jena and Auerstadt (Oct.14) ..  .. 

Napoleon issues the Berlin decree Doi ip 

The English Orders in Council .. 

Campaign in East Prussia. Battles of Rylan (Feb. 8) aha 


Friedland (June 14)... ER MIG B07, 
Treaty of Tilsit between France, Riete and Pr ussia . 598 
Kingdom of Westphalia formed for Jerome Bonaparte .. 598 
The English fleet bombards Copenhagen 599 
Stein takes office in Prussia. Issue of the Em: cascipetin Edict 604 
French conquest of Portugal. Flight of the Court to*Brazil 600 
French invasion of Spain. % 602 
Abdication of Charles IV. and Ferdinand Vil. 602 
The Spanish crown given to Joseph Bonapahed 602 
Rising in Spain. Capitulation of Baylen .. 602 
Naples given to Joachim Murat 618 
The English in Portugal. Battle of vine (Aap: 21). 603 
Convention of Cintra. The French evacuate Portugal . 603 
Dismissal of Stein 606 
Interview of Napoleon and Mi aeinaas it Er fart .. 606 
Napoleon in Spain. Joseph restored in Madrid ee 007 
Retreat of Sir John Moore. Battle of Corunna Fa o0¢. 
The French again invade Portugal fF. 607 
Austria declares war ; .- 607 
Napoleon enters Vienna (May 13) . 608 
Napoleon confiscates the Papal States 4 611 
Battles of Aspern (May 22) and Wagram (is 5, 6) is "608, 609 
Armistice of Znaim (July 12) .. °.. i) Tinie, BGOS 
The English drive the French from Ported aiid invade 

Spain.. . 609 
Battle of Talav satay 28). Weinwsten en ns to Portugal 610 


A.D. 


1809. 


1810. 


1811. 


1812. 


1813. 


1814. 


1815. 


CHRONOLOGICAL TABLE. XXV 


PAGE 
Disastrous expedition to Walcheren’... .. .. «ee | w 610 
Treaty of Vienna between France and Austria... .. 610 
Gustavus IV. of Sweden deposed. Accession of Charles XL 599 
Napoleon marries the archduchess Maria Louisa fn Oke 


Holland taken from Louis Bonaparte and annexed to Beane oa OLE 
Masséna takes Ciudad Rodrigo and invades Portugal .. .. 613 
Battle of Busaco (Sept. 29) Seliecm dermis sn) cet «. Chad 
Masséna retreats from Torres Vedras sf 613 
Wellington invades Spain. Battles of Fuentes Qnoxs (May 5) 

and Albuera (May 16). Return of the English to Portugal 614 


Wellington captures Ciudad Rodrigo (Jan. 19) and Badajoz 
ChoriL 6 he 45 .. 614 
Treaty of Bucharest Wire an Raa anid Turkey (May 28) .. 616 
Battle of Salamanca (July 22) .... jmp. G14 
Wellington occupies Madrid, but returns a Biuiad ‘Bodiied .», 614 
Napoleon’s.expedition to: Russia 7 oot, 2h os eial®).ui sieit.n G17 
Battle of) Borodino, (Sept 14)... <<nbbres oie fesse’. ELE 
Retreat of the French from Moscow .. .. .. «.  «. 617, 618 
Treaty of Kalisch between Russia and Prussia... .. .. .. 619 
War of Liberation Sup ah ieotd edd det dig) 5 8.620—-624 
Armistice of Poischwitz ure 4) ae bee as Pies i. 2) G2T 
Battle of Vittoria (June 21) decides the Bauieanken war. .. 625 
Austria joins the league against France .. ..  .. «2... 622 
Preaty, ola loplitz (Sent. 2) sacle ieee ) tas yo tomalde t6 Aled «0 G23: 
Battle of Leipzig (Oct. 18)... .. apn utaey, Oh ut G24 
Wellington fights his way through the Bexenee! Suny s ay dee) G28 
The Allies invade France .. hae bin’ gts hdbte? Sa . 625 
Capitulation of Paris (March 31) » 626 
Battle of Toulouse (April 10) . 626 
Abdication of Napoleon (April 11) 626 
Restoration of Louis XVIII. . 627 
Treaty of Paris (May 30) . 627 
Louis XVIII. issues the Charter ibaa he Wiens... 62S 
The Congress of Vienna... YS. ab629 
Napoleon leaves Elba and Jands at Canned. (Mar eh 1) JOA OSL 
Louis XVIII. flies to Ghent. Restoration of the Empire ay Gow 
Defeat of Murat at Tolentino (May 23) .. .. .. .. ~ «. 632 
Restoration of Ferdinand 1V. in Naples. “ Kingdom of the Two 
Sicilies” .. Canal ltt Deaties «3, OSe 
Battles of Ligny Ail GQuabee, Brat Cine 16) SO coe Tey ms 
Bate leot Waterloo-(June 18a iin. 32 oleae Adele nano lay [682 
Naggonmsent.to. St. Helenarret: cc yt wa, ues) al abate as 633 
necona restoration of Lonis; XVILIy is pie) vad wedi aeeet. 633 
Formation of the Holy Alliance (Sept. . ep Ry ta awa. « 636 
Death of Murat (Oct. 15) .. /.. 0 u. eit .20 fainseye 9. 4L635 


pecona, treaty. of, Paris (Noy. 20). © .a 08 ‘amiss. 633 


XXV1 CHRONOLOGICAL TABLE. 


A.D. PAGE 
1818. Congress of Aix-la-Chapelle. Withdrawal of army of occupation 
from France .. eRe Sey ARIE Ce Cee a 
1820. Death of George III. sf Enplatid: Accession of George IV. 
Assassination of the duke of Berry (Feb. 2 FoR OE, POOR s, HGAG 


Royalist reaction in France.. ..  .. . FORA, DB Oe. G41 
Revolution gn’ Spaim sae: 03 Ewe ht Peay ERT, 642 
Risings in Naples and Sicily Aes 642 


Revolution in Portugal. Separation of Br ie fc om Aertel. 643 
Congress of Troppau (Oct.), transferred to Laybach.. 1. .. 645 
1821. Austrian troops put down revolutionary movement in Naples 


and Sicily .& 08.) 2Gewe ae He ae Rea? fh B46 
Revolution in Piedmont .. .. B46 
Victor Emmanuel I. abdicates in fevistte of Char Ash Felix .. 646 
Austria helps to put down the revolution in Piedmont .. .. 646 

Death of Napoleon I. at St. Helena (May : BPO GH TEP TY 641 
Rising InsGreece. se ie ile REE SE CE Y ares, , S50 

1822... Successes of the Greeks: a Se] CYS 2, Gt sities AP Saas, SeG 51 
Congress of Verona (Oct.) . ire 647 

1823. French troops restore the authority of Ferdifvind VIL. in Sian 647 
Reaction.in Portugal .... .. 648 


1824. Death of Louis XVII. (Sept. 16). ers of Chaves x. Eide ¢. 
1825. Egyptian intervention in Greece. Successes of Ibrahim Pasha 653 
Death of Alex. I. of Russia (Dec. 1). Accession of Nicolas 648, 653 


1326, +Fall.of Missolonghi (April 2). 26% 2 fee = 2 Sees G5 
Mahmoud II. destroys the Janissaries tes ee 
Convention of Ackermann between Russia aaidt Turkey mah... A609 

1827. Treaty of London between England, eos and ‘aiateoas: ® 655 
Death of Canning (August 8) ..  ... £4 655 
Battle of Navarino (Oct. 20) ... .. Ae, 2) See 

1828. Outbreak of war between Russia and Tarkey ble Ea wees, | bas 
Dom Miguel usurps the crown in Portugal .. .. 1. .. 672 

1829.. Diebitsch crosses the Balkans .+ 4.55 (i) 220 =.) (Se *. 656 
Treaty of Adrianople .... » RMR SS, BAA Ae SEIU, GOT 

1830. ‘Revolution in France (July 28- 30) GA, © MES TEN a OS +. OBL 
Abdication of Charles X.(August i)..  .. PORES Hs, BOB 
Accession of Louis Philippe as “ Poi des Fircrg clicks 64 shh 4.. 662 
Rising in Belgium 2 od, te Mawa® Se, 5 1604 
London conference on the Belgian question » ge hte. 665 
Rising in Poland . bi 667 


Accession of Ferdinand II. (King Bombay in the Two Siciliesh. 671 
1831. Death of Charles Felix of Sardinia. Accession of Charles Albert 676 


Risings in Italy.. Austrian intervention .... fiji. Genel 
Leopold of Saxe-Coburg elected king of the Paleiniays $i 5tty. 066 
Suppression of the Polish rising me. 668 


1832. Formation of the Siebener-Concordat end die saved Bina in 
Switzerland. J. .« >. Ge eS Se bo, y OR eee 670 


A.D. 
1832 


1833. 


1854. 


1835. 
1837. 


1839. 


1840. 


1841. 


1846. 


1847. 
1848. 


1849. 


CHRONOLOGICAL TABLE. XXVli 


PAGE 
Accession of Otho I. (of Bavaria) in Greece... a, 6D7 
The Reform Bill carried in England . .. 663 
Holland recognises the independence of Belgium 667 


Interview between rulers of Russia, Austria, and Pronaid at 


Miinchengratz a ee 3. 669 
Mehemet Ali obtains Syria .. TAL 
Treaty of Unkiar Skelessi between Russia a Tur ae ». T41 


Death of Ferdinand VII. of Spain. Accession of Isabella II. .. 
Quadruple alliance between France, England, Spain, and 

Portugal. Expulsion of Dom Miguel from Portugal .. 
Victory of the Liberals in Switzerland. Dissolution of the 


679 


.. 672 


Sarner Bund (3° See) Ponies “ga Sater. ACD 
Death of Francis I. of erie Accession of Ferdinand I. .. 688 
Death cf William IV. of England. Separation of England and 

Hanover Wa Men one. 688 
War between Mahanine ate mi the Saftceadl : . TAl 
Death of Mahmoud II. Accession of Abdul Medjid.. 741 
Treaty of London. Mehemet Ali resigns Syria is _ 678, 742 
Death of Frederick William HI. of Prussia. Deven of 

Frederick William IV. . 688 
Convention of the Straits ». 742 
The Spanish marriages . Sebati ak . 680 
Election of Pope Pius IX, tie nate brs Re caaneg se ull 0 Ft 7O9Z 
War of the Sonderbund in Sw reneslatd sein wae azote» «5-687 
Death of Christian VIII. of Denmark, Accession of Fredk. VI. 691 
Rising in Sicily and Naples.. “witty jan feuieract sh. eee 
Revolution in Paris (Feb. 24). Fall of Louis Philippe. The 

Second. Republic 9. 2) testes. Litaelost a divdienh. 684 
March revolutions in Germany... .. wen 2.0 24),688-690 
Revolt of Schleswig and Holstein against Darkesuiate . 691 
Charles Albert grants a constitution to Piedmont .. .. .. 693 
Pius IX. grants a constitiation . 693 

Revolt of Lombardy and Venice against ree ‘ . 693 
War between Austria and Sardinia. Victory of Radetsky at 

Custozza .. .. .. 4. 693-694 
Meeting of the ane Pesan: ag Peanktert (May 18) .. 702 
Suppression of socialist rising in Paris (June). Dictatorship 

of Cavaignac . 686 
SeAeLAOIe 1. VACNHL seiry Tey a Ui lento ae vege > ail Be 4 GOF 
Reaction in Berlin ee 3 
Establishment of republics in Reis nih Blorence » 695 
Abdication of Ferdinand I. of Austria. Accession of Francis 

Joseph yetoe 
Louis Napoleon oe ted Pr seiieut ee the French Banulitic 030 
Open revolt of Hungary . 698 
Charles Albert renews the war. " Battle of Mires iehtenlis.% 699 


XXV111 CHRONOLOGICAL TABLE. 


A.D. PAGE 
1849. Abdication of Charles Albert. Accession of Victor Emmanuel 700 
Suppression of Hungarian revolt .. 699 
Ferdinand II. (Bomba) reduces Sicily hes pv 
Dissolution of the German parliament peer hiy 6 
French occupation of Rome qotT 00 
Reaction in Central Italy 700 
Capitulation of Venice ete es 701 
1850. Rivalry of Austria and Prasad in UGertiaht :: meachly f 
Convention of Olmiitz. Restoration of German Cénfaller atin 708 

1851. Coup d’état in France (Dec. 2). Louis Napoleon President for 
ten years .. 4 712 

1852. Treaty of London (May » Ritts! fie’ scitanayt eHolgtein 
question .. laid ahh ae eg Cee eae ae 
First ministry of Canout lad 
The Second Empire in France aga) 
1853. Outbreak of war between Russia and Turkey . 743 
1854. France and England join Turkey. ‘The Crimean war 743 
1855. Death of Nicolas of Russia (March 3). Accession of Alexander I. 744 
Evacuation of Sebastopol : . 745 
1856, Treaty of Paris ends the Crimean war ie » 745 
1858. Attempt of Orsini to assassinate Napoleon III... Aa ea 
Interview at Plombitres between Napoleon II. and Cavour .. 719 

1859. War between Austria and Sardinia. Intervention of France. — 

Magenta andSolferine ss S19 0) PONS ee TO 2720 
Peace of Villafranca ae 4% 
1860. Annexation of Tuscany, Emilia, ead Raha eae to Sardinia aie! 
Cession of Savoy and Nice to France.. Pet bs 
Garibaldi in Sicily and Naples seboe 
Battle of Castel Fidardo 723 

1861. Annexation of the Two Sicilies, Umbria, ‘aha ‘the Marches . 
Sardinia .. . 723 
Victor Emmanuel any of Tehty .. 724 
Death of Cavour .. : we ee Ore Tee's . 124 
‘Death of Abdul Medjid. eceseian of Abdul Aziz .. .. 748 
Emancipation of the Russian serfs dyke wey es eee Teo 
Death of Fredk. Wm. IV. of Prussia. Accession of William I. 725 
1862. Defeat of Garibaldi at Aspromonte S925 
Bismarck becomes Prussian minister . evkee 
Revolution in Greece. Expulsion of Otho I. 45 748 
1863. Death of Frederick VII. of Denmark. Accession échriatinn IX. 726 
Re-opening of the Schleswig-Holstein question .. . 126 
Rising in‘ Poland o> Fas . 746 
George I. becomes King of cae ; 748 

1864. Schleswig and Holstein ceded to joint occupation of ress 
and Prussia... os wa ages |, 
Suppression of the Polish Hvala . 746 


CHRONOLOGICAL TABLE. XX1X 


A.D. PAGE 
1864. Cession of the Ionian Islands to Greece... A om PEE 
1865. Convention of Gastein between Austria and Pre ussia . <acraen Oe 
1866. The Seven Weeks’ war between Austria and Pisin. us, A203. 000 

Prussia annexes Schleswig-Holstein, Hanover, Hesse-Cassel, 
Nassau, and Frankfort .. .. Bas a eau 
Campaign in Italy. Venetia ceded a Victor Rorranuel ae how 
Battle of Mentana. Renewal of French occupation of Rome 732 
-1867. The North German Confederation ... Bes i aap Ce 
Establishment of dual government in Paste H antario. we GSE 
1868. Revolution in Spain. Expulsion of Isabella II. dag Migs tas Cele 
1870. Outbreak of Franco-German war... Te ag tee SO 
Fall of the French Empire. The Third Republic gE he i Oh, 
Rome becomes the capital of Italy .. .:  .. «. -. . . 738 
1871. Proclamation of the German Empire... ..  .. «2 «.  « 737 
Treaty of Frankfort between France and Germany . : 736 

1873. Resignation of M. Thiers. Marshal MacMahon ranient Ee 

the French Republic .. oe eee or ae. 

1874. Accession of Alfonso XII. in ses sees cie pu bak Anes BOD 
1875. Rising in Bosnia and Herzegovina _.. Miia dit FAS 
1876. Deposition of Abdul Aziz. Accession of yeas v. Cae tt hetl 
“ Bulgarian atrocities”  .. newer e ci ba 
Servia and Montenegro Haare war aes Torkey Spe ral as, 
Deposition of Amurath V. Accession of Abdul Hamid I]. .. 749 
Ponterence at Constantinople. ©...) 9, se gam) awtee e 000 
1877. Russia declares war against Turkey .._.. S750 
1878. Death of Victor Emmanuel. Accession of Humbert fi ce ohn 
The Russians at Adrianople BT ay Gon) RY 8a ho st Ra POU 
Treaty of San Stefano.. .. Merde, at ee a. Toe 
Convention between England Ae Turkey ae oh Ree Toe 
Treaty of Berlin .... PN Cae. sae yd BOE 


Resignation of Marshal Maghtalous ain Cn president of 
tee Prencln hepeplic cu fee aha iar A Sie oe ade ga 737 


can Piet af + it 
baa sitter ase aRtid! aihds 23 Ye gotta 
tae tied Re 
eae enryunee atari 


ogee ext bce wcannrae 

; ‘ait Fa ntl ot syle Sy 

: ‘ i ‘ ‘= ) was 
BS _ to” 


rian eet nt bigest tints paar hinlss, 4.7 
: Take Bisicneconabigks wii ak alia rate ae 
Sar? “hy epata?: vite ale gk dard oh 
net i Aik oh, ee ae dayar'tedisie tet 
ae 2 v yee hoe inthe ond aaeronad gamit * 

Pil son 3 «edie a eagle spake settee odt to modtaarnbaatt. a 
a bee tna isnt a Rfer i Eas wes id fot goth ue Etat: e. 7 
ae: Beith: seidplt art Ss meek 1k lo gebtairgies id 

; gee, ‘aig bear jae: Le 5 

peel UK ge else Meg 

ie We MOLLE: et ban ee ie 
of eal ns ey AED. To pee 


os ied gue 


~ 


Leo | 


= as 


? D doje We all, expeeuianl® baa 
t ‘ante ter Dudana ait * irate’. 143 P 


shi tetany te Ger 


MODERN EUROPE. 


—_—~_-—— 


INTRODUCTION. 


WitHour denying the essential unity of history, it is not only 
convenient but possible to draw a fairly well-marked line between 
certain periods. Such a line is that which is usually drawn 
between ancient and modern history at the fall of Rome. It was 
not true that Roman civilization ceased to affect the world, but a 
number of new influences came into working with the barbarian 
invasions, which were sufficient to mark a new epoch. Very 
similar is the line which can be drawn between the middle ages 
and later times. The two differ. in innumerable points, in art, 
philosophy, language, literature, and commercial principles. But 
the historian is pre-eminently concerned with the radical difference 
in men’s conceptions of politics and society. 

In the middle ages there was. nothing which corresponds to the 
modern conception of the state as a nation. ‘The political unit was 
not fixed as it is now, nor was it so large as now. In some places 
it was the feudal lord and his vassals, who were bound together by 
reciprocal duties of service and defence. Elsewhere it was the 
commune, the association of citizens under a more or less indepen- 
dent municipal government. In other places it was still sm ller, 
the guild or voluntary association of men for some common object, 
either mercantile or religious. These and other similar bodies were 
the practical units of mediaeval politics. 

But in theory they were not units at all. The political theorist 
regarded the whole of Christendom as forming one state, at once 
religious and political. This was the result of the influence of the 
Roman Empire, which fascinated the barbarians who broke it to 
pieces, This idea of unity lay at the root of the Holy Roman 
Empire, which in theory still. represented the universal rule of 
Rome, long after it had lost all practical power and even influence. 
The theory was rendered more fanciful by the separation of Church 
and State, unknown before the introduction of Christianity. The 


a MODERN EUROPE. 


papacy rose side by side with the empire, and the medixval world 
regarded itself as one state with two heads. The quarrels of 
emperors and popes did much to weaken the system which both 
represented. Thus in its theoretical unity and its practical division 
the political conaition of Europe in the middle ages differed com- 
pletely from that of our own times. 

Its social condition differed no less. The unit was not smaller, 
but larger than it is now. The modern unit of society is the 
individual. In the middle ages the individual was powerless. He 
could only obtain separate importance as the holder of some office, as 
emperor, king, or bishop. Otherwise he must efface himself in a 
corporation. The social units of mediaval times were the families, 
guilds, and corporations, which were in some cases also political 
units, but which, even when they had begun to form part of some 
larger whole, continued to exist as the bases of social life. 

Though the two periods are thus distinctly divided, it is not 
possible to fix any absolute date of division. The fall of Constan- 
tinople in 1458, which brought the Eastern Empire to an end, 
which spread Greek literature and culture in western Europe, and 
which made the Turks a first-rate Hurepean power, serves as a 
convenient landmark. But the transition from the middle ages 
was going on throughout the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries. 
The most notable points in the great change are: (1) the decline 
of the empire and the papacy; (2) the rise of the people, and their 
acquisition of a share in political power; (3) the formation of 
nations ; (4) the rise of monarchy. 

(1.) The practical power of the empire had been weakened by its 

long struggle with the papacy; it was almost destroyed by the great 
interregnum (1251-72) which followed the fall of the Hohenstaufen. 
The accession ef Rudolf of Hapsburg restored order, but the empire 
jad sunk to an ordinary territorial lordship, or something even less. 
But the papacy did not reap the expected advantage from the fall 
of its old rival. The championship of the temporal power fell to 
other and stronger hands. Philip 1V. of France aefeated and 
humbled Boniface VIII. Boniface’s successor, Clement V., trans- 
ferred his residence from Rome to Avignon, and during a Babylonish 
captivity of seventy years (1305-77), the papacy was subservient 
to France. The enemies of France became the enemies of the pope. 
This gave a great impulse to that national opposition to the papacy 
which did much to direct the course of the Reformation... The 
return to Rome in 1377 was followed by the outbreak of the great 
schism (1373-1417). ‘wo popes, one in Rome, and one in Avig- 
non, claimed the allegiance of Christians. In 1409 the Council of 
Pisa elected a third pope. The Council of Constance terminated 


INTRODUCTION. 3 


the schism by the election of Martin V. But his successor 
Kugenius IV. embarked in a quarrel with the Council of Basel 
(1431-1449), in which the papacy was victorious, thongh it never 
really recovered its strength. From this time the popes sink more 
aud more into temporal rulers of the States of the Church. 

(2.) As the empire and papacy declined, a new power, that of the 
people, rose into prominence. Inu most European countries the 
towns had early established their right to form part of the political 
assemblies. But within the towns themselves democratic move- 
ments were going on in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries, 
The artisans revolted against the arbitrary rule of the merchants or 
city nobles. And gradually the conflict extended beyond the town- 
walls. The fourteenth century is an age of great popular move- 
ments. In 1291 the cantons of Uri, Schwyz, and Unterwalden 
formed their famous league. In 1815 their peasants defeated 
Leopold of Austria at Morgarten. ‘hus strengthened, the league 
extended itself and took in Lucerne in 1330, Zurich in 1350, Glaris, 
Zug and Berne in 1852. Thus was formed the league of the eight 
old cantons which in 1386 secured its independence by the 
victory of Sempach. Flanders was another important scene cf 
popular progress. In 1302 the Flemish burghers defeated Philip 
IV. at Courtrai. The people found leaders in Jacob van Artevelde, 
the ally of Edward III., and Philip van Artevelde, who was 
ultimately slain at Rosbecque in 13882. In France Etienne Marcel 
headed a movement of the third estate in 1855, which aimed at 
first at constitutional reforms, but which degenerated into a selfish 
insurrection of the Parisian mob. ‘This was accompanied in 1358 
by the fearful peasant outbreak, called the Jacquerie. In England 
we find the Lollards teaching doctrines of democratic equality, and 
in 1881 the insurrection of Wat Tyler necessitated the enfranchise- 
ment of the villeins. In the fifteenth century we come to the 
greatest of these popular movements, that of the Hussites in 
Bohemia, which for twenty years threatened to proselytise by force, 
first Germany and then Europe. But it failed because it was tov 
destructive, and because it offered no satisfactory substitute for the 
system which it attacked. ‘lhese movements were by no means 
uniformly successful, but even when they failed they were not 
without results, and they testify to a general ferment, which is a 
sign of the breaking-up of old political forms. 

(3.) With the rise of the people is intimately connected the rise 
of nations. Hitherto Kurope had been mainly divided into classes. 
Chivalry was pre-eminently a class institution. Knighthood was a 
link between the upper classes of all countries. A French and a 
German knight had more in common with each other than either had 


4 MODERN EUROPE. 


with a citizen or peasant of his own country. But this came to.an 
end as the lower classes forced their way upwards. Europe began 
to be divided vertically, instead of, as before, horizontally. The rise 
of nations was the result of the gradual growth of common interests 
which bound together the inhabitants of certain countries in 
opposition to the class-interests which had hitherto kept them 
divided. The most vivid form of common interest is common 
danger, and the chief creator of such danger has always been 
war.. Thus the Hundred Years’ War created the French, and 
consolidated the English nation. In Spain the ancient and well- 
marked divisions of Castile, Aragon and Navarre proved very 
difficult to unite. ‘he first impulse to union was the marriage of 
Ferdinand and Isabella, who held-the crowns of Aragon and Castile. 
They conquered Granada and crushed the Moors, Ferdinand 
annexed Navarre, but provincial jealousies continued to exist, and 
it was not till local life and independence had been stifled by the 
inquisition and the policy of Charles V. and Philip Il., that the 
Spanish nation was crushed and created at the same time. Two 
countries, Germany and Italy, were complete exceptions to the 
rest of Europe. Germany, nominally united, was really a loose 
federation. Italy was the battle-ground for foreign powers, and 
had no unity of its own. 

(4.) In all the nations which arose in Europe at the close of the 
middle ages, the growth of unity was accompanied by the rise of a 
strong monarchical power. The same causes were at work in both. 
cases. ‘The rise of the people, and the consequent weakening of 
class distinctions, as they aided the gradual union, so also they 
strengthened the central power. ‘This was specially the case in 
France. ‘There the crown allied itself with the third estate against 
the nobles, and thus raised itself till it could tyrannise equally 
over all classes. Foreign war too was as serviceable to monarchy 
as to nationality. Victory over the English enabled Charles V. and 
Charles VII. to found a power, which was rendered despotic by 
Louis XI. In England the whole course of events was different from 
that in France. But the result was not dissimilar. Lollard 
schemes of confiscation drove the church, formerly the champion of 
liberty, to the side of the crown. The nobles destroyed themselves 
in the Wars of the Roses. The commons by themselves were for a 
time powerless, and the Tudors established despotism. In Spain it 
was the successful wars, first against the Moors and then in Italy, 
that founded the power of the monarchy. The accession of 
Charles V. gave the crown the assistance of foreign territories. 
This power was ruthlessly employed by Charles and his son to 
crush more ancient and more firmly established liberties than 


INTRODUCTION. 5 


existed in any other country in the middle ages. Germany and 
Italy are again exceptions. As they had no unity, so they could 
have no strong central power. 

The period of transition is also marked by a great social change, 
viz., the rise {o importance of the individual. This change is closely: 
connected with the so-called Renaissance, which in its essence 
was the assertion of the rights of the individual against the 
medizval chains which had hitherto bound him down. Literature 
and art opened up a new career, over which the old restrictions had 
no control. The change was completed in the 16th century by 
the Reformation, which broke through the most oppressive trammels 
of the medieval system. 

These then are the chief points of the great change which 
inaugurated modern history. ‘The empire and papacy, the repre- 
sentatives of the old theoretical unity, lost their influence. That 
unity was replaced by large and united nations under powerful 
monarchies. Feudalism, chivalry, and the class interests which 
those institutions represented, were weakened by the rise of the 
people. And lastly, a vigorous attack was made on the repressive 
influence of the old system by the growth of freedom of thought and 
individual liberty. One may also mention without comment, the 
rise of national churches and of national literatures; the military 
change which substituted infantry for cavalry; the invention of 
gunpowder, which gave a death-blow to military feudalism; and 
' the great scientific and geographical discoveries which opened up a 
new world of thought and action. 


CHAPTER I. 
EUROPE IN THE LATTER HALF OF THE 15TH CENTURY. 


I. IrALy FROM 1453 To 1494.—§ 1. Decline of the imperial power. § 2. 
Milan under the Sforzas. § 3. Naples and Sicily under the House of 
Aragon. § 4. The Papacy; growth of nepotism. § 5. Florence under 
the Medici. § 6. Venice; policy of territorial aggression. II. GER- 
MANY FROM 1453 To 1519.—§ 7. Union of royal and imperial power; 
decline of central authority. § 8. Chief principalities of Germany ; the 
knights; the free cities ; fatal results of German disunion; attempted 
reforms under Frederick III]. § 9. Hungary, Bohemia, and Poland ; 
Ladislaus Postumus and the siege of Belgrad; Hungary and Bohemia 
separated from Austria; George Podiebrad and Matthias Corvinus. 
§ 10. Maximilian ].; reforms in the empire; advance of the House of 
Hapsburg. III. FRANCE FROM 1453 TO 1494.—§ 11. Growth of the 
French monarchy ; the dukes of Burgundy; the War of the Public 
Weal. § 12. Rivalry of Louis XI. and Charles the Bold; importance 
of Louis’ reign. § 13. Regency of Anne of Beaujeu; Charles VIII. 
prepares for his Italian expedition. IV. SPAIN FROM 1453 To 1521,— 
§ 14. Divisions of Spain; Navarre; Aragon; Castile. § 15. Ferdinand 
and Isabella; fall of Granada; the royal family ; Ferdinand’s rule after 
Isabella’s death. § 16. Accession of Charles I.; revolt of the Com- 
munes. V. OTTOMAN EMPIRE, 1453 TO 1520,—§ 17. Causes of Turk- 
ish success; conquests of Mohammed II.; Bajazet II.; lull in Turkish 
aggression. § 19. Selim I.; conquest of Syria and Egypt. 


J. Iraty From 1453 To 1494. 


§ 1. Irany and Germany, the two countries whose history stands out | 
in complete contrast to the rest of Kurope, were connected together 
by the fact that both were nominally subject to the same power, the 
Holy Roman Empire. This was the chief cause that neither of 
them attained to national unity. The Empire, by its nature, could . 
not be hereditary. Elective princes held their power on very 
precarious terms; they had none of the ordinary motives for 
extending that power; and the electors were able to extort 
coucessions which secured their own independence. Moreover, the 
attempt to rule two such distinct countries did much to destroy 
any real authority over either. 
It was in Italy that the imperial power first became a practical 


A.D. 1450-1494. MILAN UNDER THE SFORZAS. 7 


nullity. The Hohenstaufen were the last emperors who made a 
serious effort to rule the southern kingdom, The invasions of 
Henry VII. and of Lewis the Bavarian, only proved the vanity of 
such an effort. Charles IV. (1846-1378), the founder of the great- 
ness of the Luxemburg house, with a self-control rare in that age, 
purposely left Italy to its fate. ‘The decline of the imperial power 
enabled independent despots to establish their power in most of the 
Italian states. Nearly every city had its own petty dynasty, as 
the Kstensi in Ferrara, the Gonzagas in Mantua, the Bentivogli in 
Bologna, and the Baglioni in Perugia. But the most important of 
the States subject to despotism were Milan in the north, and 
Naples and Sicily in the south. 

§ 2. Milan was ruled from the beginning of the 14th century by 
the Visconti. In 1395, the emperor Wenzel gave to Gian Galeazzo 
Visconti the title of duke. But in 1447 his son Filippo Maria 
died without legitimate issue, After a short-lived effort to restore 
republican government, which failed through the jealousy of the 
neighbouring states, a successful military leader, Francesco Sforza, 
conquered Milan and established a new dynasty. His ‘first task 
was to defend himself against Venice, the rival of Milan for the 
supremacy in northern Italy. But the news of the fall of Con- 
stantinople terrified the combatants, and the war was terminated 
by the peace of Lodi in 1454. From this time Francesco Sforza 
gave up his military career and devoted himself to the peaceful 
government of his duchy. His chief supports were the friendship 
of Louis XI. of France, and of the Florentine Cosimo de Medici. 
He also maintained a close alliance with the kings of Naples. - His 
connection with France enabled Sforza to annex Genoa in 1464. 
This was his last great success; and he died in 1466 leaving Milan 
to his eldest son Galeazzo Maria. Galeazzo Sforza represents the 
worst type of an Italian despot; he was selfish, debauched, 
suspicious, and cruel. Fortunately the continued influence’ of his 
father’s ministers kept him for some time to a peaceful policy. 
The French alliance was cemented by his marriage with Bona of 
Savoy, whose sister was the wife of Louis XI. But Galeazzo was 
rash enough to alienate Louis by an alliance with Charles the Bold. 
The defeat of the latter at Granson (1476) compelled him to sue 
for pardon which was contemptuously granted. After ten years of 
tyranny and misgovernment, he was assassinated by three of the 
citizens whom he had grievously injured. He left an infant son, 
Gian Galeazzo, under the guardianship of Bona of Savoy. The 

guiding spirit of the regency was Francesco. Simonetta, formerly 
secretary to Francesco Sforza and the devoted adherent of the 
policy of his former patron. The regency was attacked by the 


8 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. L 


brothers of the late duke, who were indignant at their exclusion 
from power. They were foiled by Simonetta’s vigilance and forced 
to leave Milan. But Simonetta’s adherence to the Medici roused 
. powerful enemies. Ferdinand of Naples and Sixtus IV., who were 
- anxious to crush Florence, determined, as a preliminary, to over- 
throw the Milanese regency. ‘They encouraged Lodovico Sforza, 
the ablest of the exiled princes, to renew his intrigues. In 1479, 
Simonetta was imprisoned and put to death, Bona of Savoy was 
removed from the regency, and Lodovico Sforza became supreme in 
Milan as the guardian of Gian Galeazzo. Lodovico was personally 
timid, but endowed with more than Italian cunning. His am- 
bition was to supersede his nephew and to make himself duke. His 
unscrupulous pursuit of this object was destined to bring the 
greatest disasters upon Italy and ultimately upon himself. 

§ 3. Naples and Sicily, in the 11th century, had been formed into 
one kingdom under Norman rule. ‘Two centuries later they had 
been conquered by Charles of Anjou, brother of Louis IX. of 
France, who was called in by the popes to oppose the Hohenstaufen, 
But in 1282, a revolt, known as the Sicilian Vespers, drove the 
French from Sicily, and gave that island to the house of Aragon, 
From this time Naples and Sicily were divided until the extinction 
of the original house of Anjou by the death of Joanna II. in 1435, 
Alfonso V., already king of Aragon, Sicily, and Sardinia, now 
obtained the crown of Naples after a contest with Réné ie Bon of 
Provence, the representative of a second Angevin line which was 
descended from Louis, brother of Charles V., and which rested its 
claims not on descent but on adoption. Alfonso V., by his 
patronage of literature and art, and by maintaining Naples in 
unwonted peace, has earned from historians the title of ‘the 
Magnanimous.” On his death in 1458, he left Aragon, Sicily, and 
Sardinia to his brother, John II., while Naples, as a more personal 
possession, he bequeathed to his natural son Ferdinand I. This 
arrangement was contested in Naples where the Angevin claim was 
revived. . Réné le Bon resigned his pretensions to his son John of 
Calabria, who was at this time governor of Genoa for Charles VII. 
of France. At first John gained important successes. But other 
Italian powers were opposed to the establishment of French in- 
fluence in Italy. Especially, Francesco Sforza, though formerly 
the enemy of the house of Aragon, now gave consistent support to 
Ferdinand. And John’s failure was assured when Charles VII. 
was succeeded in 1461 by Louis XI., who regarded with jealousy 
the house of Anjou. Jn 1464 John left Italy and showed his 
sense of Louis’ hostility by joining the league of French nobles 
against him. Ferdinand I. was now firmly established in Naples, 


A.D. 1453-1494. THE POPES IN THE 15TH CENTURY. 9 


His foreign policy will be best noticed in connection with the 
history of other states. At home his rule was in the highest 
degree oppressive and tyrannical, especially after the association in 
the government of his son, Alfonso of Calabria. The treacherous 
cruelty with which these princes treated the Neayolitan barons was 
one among the many circumstances which helped to bring the 
I’rench into Italy. 

§ 4. The papacy occupied a unique position among Italian powers. 
From a very early time the popes had endeavoured to supplement 
their universal spiritual authority by obtaining the secular rule of 
Rome and the neighbcuring territory. ‘Their claims were based on 
donations, real or pretended, of Roman emperors and Frankish 
kings. Their temporal dominions may be regarded as _ legally 
established by the cession of Rudolf of Hapsburg, and included 
Rome itzelf, the Patrimony of St. Peter, Romagna, and the March 
of Ancona. But the withdrawal of the popes to Avignon (1305- 
1377) enabled nobles and towns nominally subject to them, to 
throw off their allegiance, and the states of the church fell into the 
wildest anarchy. Cardinal Albornoz, as papal legate, restored the 
suzerainty of the popes, but only by confirming local independence. 
The Great Schism (1378-1417) azain reduced the papal authority to 
a shadow. Martin V. (1417-1431) re-established his government 
in Rome, but only by identifying his interests with those of the 
Colonnas, his own family. Eugenius IV. (1431-1447), who en- 
deavoured to abase the Colonnas, was driven by them from the 
city. But while he resided in Florence, his legates, Vitelleschi 
and Scarampo, reduced Rome to submission. Under Nicolas V. 
(1447-1458) a last attempt to revive republican independence in 
Rome was put down, and the ring-leader, Stephen Porcaro, was put 
to death. From this time the temporal sovereignty of the popes 
produced its natural result, nepotism. Men who had no chance of 
founding.a dynasty, and who, elected in their old age, could expect 
but a short tenure of power, made their first object the aggrandise- 
meat of their relatives. Only one or two, more magnanimous than 
the rest, were roused by the Turkish advance to energetic labours on 
behalf of Christendom. 

Calixtus III. (1455-1458) conferred the cardinal’s hat on his 
nephew, Rodrigo Borgia, who was destined to carry nepotism to its 
extreme, and to bring lasting discredit on the papacy. Pius IL. 
(1458-1464), the famous Aineas Sylvius Piccolomini, redeemed a 
worldly and careless youth by devoted efforts to rouse the temporal 
princes to a crusade against the Turks. But the age of crusades 
was past; international jealousy and the desire of territorial 
aggrandisement were too powerful to allow any combination of 


10 MODERN EUROPE. | CHAP. I. 


European powers in a joint enterprise. The Congress of Mantua 
(1459) proved a complete failure, and Pius had to content himself 
with renewing the war between Venice and the Turks. ‘The old 
pope died on the beach at Ancona, whither he had proceeded to 
superintend in person the embarkation of the crusading fleet. 
Paul II. (1464-1471), himself a Venetian, was expected to give 
sreat assistance to his countrymen. But he was absorbed in secular 
interests, and he even aided the ‘Turks by impelling Matthias 
Corvinus, the ally of Venice, to make war on the Bohemian heretics. 
His successor, Sixtus IV. (1471-1484), was one of the worst popes 
even of the 15th century. He had five nephews: Girolamo and 
Pietro Riario, Lionardo, Giuliano and Giovanni della Rovere. All 
of them were raised to distinction either within or without the 
church. For Girolamo Riario he obtained Imola and Forli; and 
the endeavour to carve out a principality for this favoured nephew 
involved Italy in wars which still more divided the country and 
prepared the way for foreign invasion. Innocent VIII. (1484- 
1492), far less active than his predecessor, is notorious as the first 
pope who openly acknowledged his own children. But he was 
content to enrich his son, Franceschetto Cibo, with the spoils of the 
Roman curia, without attempting to alienate papal territories in his 
favour. On Innocent’s death, the most prominent aspirants to the 
tiara were Giuliano della Rovere, nephew of Sixtus IV., and after- 
wards pope as Julius II., and Ascanio Sforza, the younger brother 
of Lodovico. As neither could obtain the requisite majority, the 
cardinals allowed their votes to be purchased by Rodrigo Borgia, the 
nephew of Calixtus III., who in 1492 became pope with the title 
of Alexander VI. 

§ 5. There were only two important states in Italy whose 
government was professedly republican, Florence and Venice. The 
liberties of Florence had long been undermined, first by the 
Albizzi, (1378-1484), and afterwards by the Medici. Cosimo de 
Medici, the founder of the greatness of his family, headed the 
opposition to the Albizzi as the champion of the lower classes. In 
1433 Rinaldo Albizzi procured the banishment of his rival. But 
during his absence a revolution took place, the Albizzi were driven 
into exile, and Cosimo returned from Venice to become the ruler of 
Florence. He was careful to disguise his supremacy by the main- 
tenance of constitutional forms and by retaining the habits of life 
of a private citizen. He found his chief supports in the favour of 
the lower classes and the wealth which he obtained hy commerce. 
He was a distinguished patron of art and literature. By maintain- 
ing friendly relations with Milan on the one side and Naples on 
the other, he was able to act as a mediator in Italian politics. He 


A.D. 1478. CONSPIRACY OF THE PAZZI. 11 


died in 1464, and the title of pater patric was inscribed upon his 
tomb. His son Piero (1464-9), who succeeded him in middle 
age, had to confront a confederacy of powerful citizens who were 
jealous of the Medici supremacy. But though the conspirators 
were supported by Venice, always jealous of the commercial 
prosperity of Florence, they were defeated; and Piero, in spite of 
the ill-health which crippled him, left his family more powerful 
at his death than it had been at his accessicn. 

Piero left two sons, Lorenzo and Giuliano, the elder of whom 
now became the ruler of Florence, and has obtained a great name 
‘in history. For nine years he governed in peace and prosperity. 
He was careful to follow his grandfather’s policy, and to maintain 
the alliance with Milan and Naples. But his power was shaken 
and almost destroyed by a quarrel with Sixtus ITV. Lorenzo had 
gone in person to congratulate the pope on his accession, and the 
Medici had been appointed receivers of the papal revenues. This 
good understanding did not last long. Sixtus gave the arch- 
bishopric of Pisa to Francesco Salviati, but Pisa was subject to 
Florence, and Lorenzo refused to recognise the appointment. A 
far more important cause of quarrel was the opposition of the 
Medici to the pope’s schemes on behalf of Girolamo Riario. The 
Florentines were hostile to the creation of a new dynasty in 
Romagna, and when Sixtus wished to horrow money for the 
purchase of Imola, the Medici refused the loan. Their post at 
Rome was taken from them and given to the Pazzi, another and 
hostile Florentine family. But the pope, not content with this, 
wished to destroy the Medici supremacy in Florence. With his 
sanction a conspiracy was formed by Girolamo Riario, Salviati, and 
the Pazzi. It is doubtful whether the pope was cognisant of the 
scheme for assassinating the two brothers. On Palm Sunday, 1478, 
the attempt was made in the cathedral of Florence. Giuliano de 
Medici was slain, but the priests who had been specially chosen to 
commit the sacrilege of murder in a church, failed in their attack 
on Lorenzo, and he escaped, though wounded, to the sacristy. The 
city rose in his defence, and prompt vengeance was taken on the 
conspirators. Salviati, in his archiepiscopal robes, was hanged 
with his colleagues from the windows of the Palazzo Vecchio. 
The news of these events infuriated Sixtus IV., who excom- 
municated the Florentines, and concluded an alliance against them 
with Ferdinand of Naples. ‘Thus the balance of the Italian states, 
which had been so dear to Cosimo de Medici and Francesco Sforza, 
was suddenly overthrown. Hitherto Milan, Florence, and Naples 
had stood together, and had been strong enough to maintain the 
peace against Venice and the papacy. Now Italy was geographi- 


12 MODERN EUROPE. | Onar. 1 


cally divided into two hostile leagues; in the north, Milan, Venice, 
and Florence; in the south, Naples and the pope. 

In the war which followed Florence was reduced to the greatest 
straits. . Venice was a feeble and vacillating ally; Milan rendered 
what assistance it could, but, as has been seen, the friendly 
government of Simonetta was weakened and overthrown by the 
intrigues of Ferdinand of Naples. Lorenzo de Medici relied with 
confidence on the support of France. Louis XI. sent Philippe de 
Commines to Florence, but an envoy without troops could effect 
nothing. ‘Thus Florence was left to its own defence. Alfonso of 
Calabria took Siena and a number of the Florentine fortresses. But 
fortunately a coolness sprang up between the pope and his ally, 
and Lorenzo took advantage of this to pay a personal visit to 
Ferdinand. With him he concluded a separate treaty, which was 
at last reluctantly accepted by Sixtus IV. Florence was not yet 
out of danger, as Alfonso of Calabria tried to obtain permanent 
possession of Siena. But the capture of Otranto by the Turks in 
1480 compelled the Neapolitan troops to withdraw for the defence 
of their own country. 

The failure of the conspiracy of the Pazzi and the extrication of 
Florence from pressing danger, strengthened the hands of Lorenzo. 
He was now able to make his government more despotic, and to 
get rid of many of the popular forms which had hitherto hampered 
him. ‘The citizens began to address him with a servility hitherto 
unknown, and Florence witnessed the establishment of a splendid 
~ court, which resembled while it surpassed the courts of the 
northern despots. Lorenzo was himself a poet of no mean 
capacity, and his munificent patronage of art and _ literature, 
while it benefited Italy and the world, has helped to give him 
too lofty a reputation. His abilities, both as a ruler and a dip- 
lomatist, were unquestionable. But his honesty was not above 
the conventionai Italian standard, and by destroying Florentine 
freedom he helped to degrade the political life of Italy. Lorenzo 
found it impossible to combine, as Cosimo had done, the func- 
tions of a statesman and a man of business. As _ the political 
power of the Medici increased, their mercantile profits diminished, 
and there can be no doubt that Lorenzo employed the public funds 
to support his own failing credit. But his name was gratefully 
remembered in Italy as the successful advocate of peace. When war 
was inevitable he laboured to maintain the balance of power. His 
death in 1492, at the early age of 41, was felt asa national disaster, 
and his best fame is the general belief that had he lived longer he 
might have averted many of the subsequent troubles from Italy. 

Lorenzo left three sons; Piero, who succeeded him, Giovanni, 


Av. 1458-1494. VENICE IN THE 15TH CENTURY. 18 


afterwards famous as pope Leo X., and Giuliano. His brother 
Giuliano, the victim of the Pazzi conspiracy, had left a natural 
son, Giulio, who plays a prominent though ill-fated part in later 
history as Clement VII. The Florentines were soon made con- 
scious of the loss they had sustained. Piero de Medici was as 
rash as his father had been prudent. He irritated the citizens by 
his contemptuously public assumption of despotic authority. And 
his foreign policy was still more ruinous. Deserting the traditional 
policy of his family, he identified his interests wholly with Naples, 
and thus alienated Milan just at a time when the unity of Italy 
was required to avert a foreign invasion. 

’ §6. Perhaps the most prominent of Italian states in the eyes of 
Europe was Venice. ‘The stability of its institutions, its com- 
mercial wealth, and the success of its cautious policy, combined to 
dazzle both philosophers and practical politicians. The Venetian 
government was a close and suspicious oligarchy. Power was 
confined to those families whose names were inscribed in the 
Golden Book. But among them a number of institutions had 
been devised which gradually restricted executive power to fewer 
and fewer hands, and thus secured that secresy which the Venetians 
regarded as the highest object of government. In the 15th century 
the famous Council of ''en was supreme in Venice. 

Ever since the fourth crusade (1204), Venice had held important 
possessions in Hastern Europe, and had euriched itself with the 
commerce of the Levant. But the advance of the Turks had 
diminished their territories and crippled their commerce. ‘To 
compensate themselves for these losses in the east, they aimed at 
increasing their power in Italy. Under the famous doge, I’rancesco 
Foscari (1425-1457), they acquired large possessions, and contested 
with Milan the supremacy in northern Italy. But the acquisition 
of empire diverted the Venetians from their true task, and in the 
end proved fatal to their greatness. 

When Constantinople fell, the Venetians were most immediately 
concerned in resisting the Turks. But the party of peace, which 
had opposed the aggressive policy of Foscari, had now the 
upper hand, and the republic concluded a separate treaty with 
Mohammed. II., by which it expected to secure its own interests 
while sacrificing those of Europe. Soon afterwards Foscari, who 
had been already attacked through his son, was compelled to 
resign, and died as the bells were ringing to announce the election 
of a new doge. But the selfish policy of his opponents proved a 
failure. The Turks annexed Greece and most of the adjacent 
islands, and the Venetians were at last compelled to take up arms. 
Tn the war they met with great and almost unmixed reverses, ard 


14 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. T. 


in 1479 they concluded the ignominious treaty of Constantinople, 
by which they surrendered great part of their territories, and con- 
sented to hold the rest as tributaries of the Sultan. It was but a 
slight compensation that they were able soon afterwards to annex 
Cyprus. The last king, James of Lusignan, had married a 
Venetian lady, Catharine da Cernaro, whom the republic adopted 
asa daughter, On the king’s death (1473), the Venetians stepped 
in as guardians of the widow, and before long compelled her to 
abdicate in their favour. 

The Venetians now devoted themselves to a policy of selfish 
aggrandisement in Italy. Always hostile to Naples, they were 
suspected, not without reason, of encouraging the Turks to attack 
Otranto. And in 1482 they commenced a wholly unprovoked war 
against their neighbour, the duke of Ferrara, Sixtus 1V., hoping to 
turn a disturbance in Romagna to the profit of Girolamo Riario, 
allied himself with them. The Venetians scized the Polesine of 
Rovigo, and the duke of Ferrara was brought to the verge of ruin. 
But Lorenzo de Medici considered that the war threatened the 
balance of power, and formed a league for the defence of Ferrara with 
Ferdinand of Naples and Lodovico Sforza. Thus the old balance 
of the Italian states, which had been overthrown after the Pazzi 
conspiracy, was restored, a great triumph for Lorenzo’s diplomacy. 
Sixtus, finding that he was excluded from all share in the Venetian 
spoils, joined the league, and Venice was reduced to great straits. 
But Lodovico Sforza had become suspicious of the Neapolitan 
rulers, who were inclined to support his nephew against him. He 
opened relations with the Venctian commander, Robert of San 
Severino, and negotiated the treaty of Bagnolo which closed the war 
in 1484. By this the Venetians retained the Polesine, and the duke 
of Ferrara was the only sufferer. Sixtus 1V. was extremely chagrined 
at the news of the treaty, and died soon afterwards—as the lampooners 
would have it—of peace. In this war the Venetians had displayed 
a selfish contempt for Italian interests which boded ill for the 
country in its coming trials. 


IJ. GerMANY FROM 1453 To 1519. 


§ 7. Germany, like most the European states, was subject toa king. 
He was chosen by seven electors, the Archbishops of Mainz, Kéln, 
and ‘Trier, the count palatine of the Rhine, the duke of Saxony, the 
margrave of Brandenburg, and the king of Bohemia. By a series of 
events, which it is beyond our province to trace, the German king 
nad come to be regarded as the head of the Holy Roman Empire, 
the apex of the political system as the pope was of the hierarchy, — 


A.D. 1453-1519. GERMANY IN THE 15fH CENTURY. 15 


He assumed the title of King of the Romans on election, and the 
higher title of Emperor after coronation by the pope. This com- 
bination of two offices in themselves distinct, had important results. 
The monarchy remained elective, because the highest’ temporal 
dignity on earth could hardly be eonfined to a single family. And 
the vague nature of the more lofty authority tended to make the 
royal power equally vague and indistinct. ‘The German monarchy, 
in the early middle ages the strongest in Europe, had sunk by the 
15th century to be the weakest and most neglected. The princes 
who nominally acknowledged the imperial authority had made 
themselves practically independent. 

This had not taken place without numerous efforts to prevent it. 
Charles IV. (1846-13878) whose policy has long been an unsolved 
puzzle, tried to get rid of the profitless burden of the empire and to 
found a territorial monarchy like that in Franceand England. But 
he died before this could be accomplished, and his sons had neither 
the will nor the ability to complete his schemes. Under his successor 
Wenzel, a schism broke out (1400-1411) which was almost as 
fatal to theempire as the contemporary schism in the church to the 
papacy. 

From this time the main interest of German history centres round 
the efforts which were made to form a federal union in place of the 
monarchy, and thus to repress disorder. The Hussite war gave a 
great impulse to such attempts, and notable changes were proposed, 
especially in 1427, by Frederick 1., the first Hohenzollern margrave 
of Brandenburg. His scheme was to found an imperial standing 
army and to inaugurate regular assemblies and a system of common 
taxation. But he was foiled by the party among the princes which 
regarded anarchy as the best security for their own independence. 
In 1488 this party secured the election of Albert of Austria. From 
this time to the fall of the empire in 1806 it remained practically 
hereditary in the house of Hapsburg. ‘This family represented 
devotion to dynastic interests, and did nothing for the unity of 
Germany. During the long reign of Frederick III. (1440-1494) 
that unity seemed likely to disappear altogether. 

The German diet-was a purely feudal assembly, and contained 
only direct’ tenants in chief of the empire. This secured the power 
of the princes, as their subjects had no share in the assembly. The 
diet was divided into three chambers which sat separately. ‘The 
first comprised the six electors, excluding the king of Bohemia who 
took no part in the diet. Next came the princes, both lay and 
ecclesiastical, and thirdly, the deputies of the free imperial cities, 
who had obtained a place in the diet in the 14th century, but were 
looked down upon by the other chambers 


a ee aD eS 


16 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. L 


§ 8. The most prominent of the German states were Brandenburg, 
Saxony, the Palatinate, Bavaria, Austria and Wurtemburg. Bran- 
denburg had been given by Sigismund in 1415 to the house of 
Hohenzollern, previously burgraves of Nuremberg, and the ancestors 
of the later kings of Prussia. Saxony, on the extinction of the 
male Welf line in 1422, had fallen to the house of Wettin. This | 
was now represented by two brothers, Ernest and Albert, who 
agreed in 1484 to divide their territories by the treaty of Leipzig. 
Ernest kept Saxe- Wittenberg and Thuringia with the electoral title, 
while Albert took the remaining territories with the title of duke. 
The Palatinate was held by the elder branch of the house of 
Wittelsbach. The death of Lewis IX. in 1449 left the country to 
an infant son Philip under the guardianship of his uncle Frederick. 
This Frederick the Victorious, who obtained a great reputation, was 
allowed on the plea of the troubled times to supplant his nephew 
in the electorate on condition that he would never marry. Tie 
emperor Frederick III. refused to ratify this agreement, and found 
an implacable opponent in the able and energetic elector. On the 
death of Frederick the Victorious in 1476, the Palatinate passed again 
to his nephew Philip. Bavaria was held by a younger branch of 
the same house of Wittelsbach, and was weakened at this time by 
division into three duchies, Ingolstadt, Landshut and Munich. 
The two former lines became extinct, and in 1502 Bavaria was re- 
united under Albert 1]. of Munich. 

Austria, the most powerful of the non-electoral territories, had 
been acquired in the 13th century by Rudolf, count of Hapsburg in 
Swabia, who was also king of the Romans. His descendants had 
since occasionally held the empire, and from 1438 obtained un- 
interrupted possession of that dignity. But the most striking point 
in their history hitherto was their steady acquisition of territories in 
the east. One after another, Styria, Carinthia and Tyrol had been 
annexed, and for a time Hungary and Bohemia were subject to them. 
Like other German families, the Hapsburgs had often been weakened 
by the practice of subdivision, but under Frederick III. and his son 
Maximilian, all the family territories were reunited. From this 
time the Hapsburgs became a prominent Enropean power. Wur- 
temberg, previously a small country, was raised to the rank of a 
duchy in 1495 for Eberhard the elder. 

It is obvious that German unity had little chante amidst the 
jarring interests of so many independent princes. But this was not 
the worst evil under which the country suffered. Below the princes 
were an important body of lesser nobles, the knights or Ritters. 
They claimed to be independent of any power except the empire, 
but they were excluded from the diet. Thus they had no interest in 


A.D, 1440-1493. REIGN OF FREDERICK III. 17 


the general welfare and fought for their own hand. Living in stray 
and isolated castles, they organised a regular system of highway- 
robbery which destroyed peaceful industry. At the same time by 
incessant feuds with the princes and among themselves they kept 
the country involved in civil strife. 

The free cities were the most progressive and promising elements 
of German political life. Many of them had acquired great wealth, 
which with their fortifications made them important. But the 
opposition of their interests to those of the princes and knights com- 
pelled them to pursue a selfish policy, and thus they too were a 
hindrance rather than a help to the unity of Germany. 

The evil results of German division were clearly visible in the 
gradual falling away of border-territories, and in the ageressions of 
foreign princes. Italy had already gone. When Frederick III. went 
to home in 1452 to receive the imperial crown, he was compelled to 
go without an armed retinue and to leave the country directly after 
the ceremony. ‘The Swiss cantons, which had established their 
independence in opposition to the Hapsburgs, would pay no 
obedience to the empire while it was held by that house. In the 
north the Hanseatic League, which was strong enough to overcome 
both Scandinavian kings and German princes, stood practically 
outside the empire. ‘The kings of Poland gained constant successes 
against the Teutonic knights, who in 1466 were compelled to cede 
creat part of their territories and to hold the rest under Polish 
suzerainty. But the most considerable losses of Germany were in 
the west. The dukes of Burgundy, members of the royal family 
of France, had obtained, by marriage, conquest or cession, a number 
of imperial provinces, which they annexed to large French possessions. 
There was little doubt that Charles the Bold (1466-1477) intended 
to fuse these provinces into an independent kingdom, and was only 
prevented by a series of unforeseen accidents which terminated in 
his death. ’ 

In the face of these disasters and the still graver dangers which 
were threatened by the Turks, I’rederick III. remained obstinately 
inactive. The princes, who had elected him mainly on account of 
his inactivity, began to repent when they discovered that they were 
left defenceless. A scheme was formed to depose him and to elect 
George Podiebrad, the Hussite king of Bohemia. But in face of this 
common danger, those old rivals, the empire and the papacy, formed 
a close alliance, and the scheme fell through. But the desire for 
reform had been roused and could not now be suppressed, though it 
was diverted to another direction. As the emperor would do 
nothing, the task of reform fell upon the estates, The first need 
“was to put an end to private wars, and the measure known as the 
5 


Ee a ee 


18 MODERN EUROPE. | CHAP, I. 


Public Peace was passed by successive diets from 1466 to 1486. But 
it was found to be of little use to make laws while there was no 
machinery to enforce them. An attempt was therefore made in 
1486 to extort from Frederick III. the establishment of a central 
judicial court, the Imperial Chamber. But Frederick clung ob- 
stinately to his traditional rights, and succeeded in postponing 
reform during his lifetime. Some success, however, was attained. 
In 1488 the Swabian League was formed of princes, knights and 
citizens to decide disputes by arbitration. In 1492 the league, 
supported by the empire, gained a great success in compelling 
Albert I]. of Bavaria to cede territories which he held unlawfully. 

The reign of Frederick ILI. is of primary importance in the history 
of the house of Hapsburg. By marrying his son Maximilian to 
Mary, the heiress of Burgundy (1477), he founded the European 
greatness of his family. But in spite of this and other successes, in 
his personal relations with his subjects and his neighbours he was 
hardly more fortunate than in the empire. 

§ 9. In the fifteenth century the eastern kingdoms, Hungary, ~ 
Bohemia, and Poland had an importance quite out of proportion to 
their present condition. This was due, in the case of Hungary, to its 
position as a barrier against the Turks, in the case of Bohemia and 
Poland, to the great conflict between the Germans and the Slavs. 
In the eleventh century the Slavs occupied northern Germany 
almost to the North Sea. From this territory they had been 
gradually driven east wards, first by the dukes of Saxony, then by the 
Hanse towns, and lastly by the Teutonic knights, who occupied 
Prussia. ‘Thus the southern coast of the Baltic became German. 
But in the fifteen century the tide of victory turned. ‘The house of 
Jagellon obtained Poland in 1386, and undertook the championship 
of the Slavs. From this time they were engaged in constant war 
with the Teutonic Order. The Hussite movement in Bohemia was 
to a great extent a national revolt against German influences. The 
height of the Slavonic reaction was reached in 1466, when the peace 
of Thorn annexed great part of Prussia to Poland. 

The Emperor Albert II. (1488-9) had been the first to unite 
Hungary and Bohemia to Austria. But he died within two years 
of making this acquisition, and his only son, Ladislaus Postumus, 
was not born till after his death in 1440. Austria and Bohemia 
acknowledged the infant prince, but the Hungarians, under the 
influence of John Huniades, chose Ladislaus VI. of Poland. The 
Polish king was killed in 1444 at the battle of Varna, and Hungary 
also acknowledged Ladislaus Postumus, who had been placed under 
the guardianship of Frederick III. It was not till 1453 that he became 
independent at the age of fourteen. Hungary and Bohemia remained 


A.D. 1453-1491. THE EASTERN KINGDOMS. 19 


under regents, John Huniades and George Podiebrad. Ladislaus 
himself fell under the influence of an Austrian noble, the Count of 
Cilly, who tried to make him jealous of the other governors, 
especially of Huniades. But the latter’s presence in Hungary was 
now a Huropean necessity. Mohammed II., who had paused after 
the capture ef Constantinople in 1453, resumed his advance, and in 
1456 laid siege to Belgrad. Belgrad stands at the junction of the 
Danube and the Save, and its capture would have opened to the 
Turks, not only Hungary but the whole of Germany to the Rhine. 
At this crisis Huniades, assisted by a friar Capistrano, but neglected 
by the European princes, raised an untrained and ill-equipped force. 
With this he first destroyed the Turkish fleet on the Danube, and 
having thus secured an entrance to the fortress, he repulsed the 
assault of the whole Turkish army. Mohammed II., completely 
defeated, fled to Sofia. Soon after this marvellous success, Huniades 
died, leaving two sons Ladislaus and Matthias. ‘lhe elder son 
murdered Cilly, the king’s favourite, at Belgrad, and for this was put 
to death in 1477. The younger, Matthias, was carried a prisoner to 
Prague. There, in the midst of preparations for his marriage with 
Madeleine, daughter of Charles VII. of France, Ladislaus Postumus 
died of the plague (Dec. 1457). His death severed the connection of 
Hungary and Bohemia with Austria for more than half a century. 

Austria being a male fief, passed without question to the three 
surviving Hapsburg princes; and ultimately to Frederick III. But in 
Bohemia and Hungary the settlement of the succession was far more 
difficult. Ultimately it was decided to pass over all dynastic claims, 
whether based upon treaties or hereditary right. Hungary, to show 
its sense of the heroic and ill-requited services of Huniades, elected 
his surviving son Matthias Corvinus. Bohemia, in defiance of 
German claims and in still more open defiance of the papacy, gave 
the crown to the Utraquist leader, George Podiebrad. 

Matthias Corvinus emulated the achievements of his father as the 
champion of Europe against the Turks. But unfortunately he 
became involved in quarrels with his neighbours. Ecclesiastical 
intolerance could not endure a Hussite on the Bohemian throne. 
Pope Paul IL. issued a bull deposing Podicbrad, and entrusted its 
execution to Matthias. The war between Hungary and Bohemia 
was still going on when Podiebrad died in 1471. The Bohemians, 
to obtain the support of the other Slavs, now elected Wladislaus, 
the son of the king of Poland. Matthias himself claimed the crown ~ 
and carried on the war with great vigour. I*rederick IIL, who had 
been his ally, deserted him to go over to Wladislaus. In 1479, the 
treaty of Olmiitz was concluded between Hungary and Bohemia, by 
which Lausitz, Moravia and Silesia were ceded to Matthias. He now 


20 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. 1. 


turned his arms against Austria and, in 1485, captured Vienna. 
The lord of the world became an exile from his own capital. 
Under Matthias, Hungary reached the zenith of its power. He died 
in 1490, and his subjects elected as his successor his former rival, 
Wladislaus of Bohemia. Maximilian, Frederick III.’s son, now 
recovered Vienna, and even invaded Hungary, but without per- 
manent result. In 1491 the treaty of Pressburg restored all 
Austrian territories to Frederick III., and the succession in Hun- 
gary and Bohemia was secured to the Hapsburgs on the extinction 
of the male descendants of Wladislaus. 

§ 10. Soon afterwards Frederick III. died in August, 1493. Maxi- 
milian, who was already lord of the Netherlands by his marriage with 
Mary of Burgundy, and who had been elected King of the Romans 
in his father’s lifetime, now obtained the empire and all the 
Austrian territories. The accession of a young and vigorous prince 
gave a new impulse to the schemes of reform which had been foiled 
by the obstinacy of Frederick III. 

In 1495 Maximilian summoned the important diet of Worms. 
He himself wanted money to cppose the French in Italy, and the 
estates, undr the guidance of the elector Berthold of Mainz, took 
advantage of his needs to demand constitutional concessions. A 
general tax, the “‘Common Penny,” which had been one of the 
schemes of 1427, was now imposed in proportion to the population. 
Its collection and expenditure were entrusted, not to the emperor, 
but to nominees of the estates. The Public Peace was again 
enjoined, and to enforce it a great reform was made in the supreme 
court of justice. Hitherto it had always followed the emperor, and 
its members had been appointed by him. It was now fixed in a 
definite place, its members were appointed by the diet, and the 
president alone was nominated by the emperor. This reformed 
court, the Imperial Chamber, plays a great part in later German 
history. 

But these reforms did not produce immediate results of import- 
ance. Maximilian had only accepted them to further his foreign 
policy. As that policy proved unsuccessful, he was by no means 
anxious to fulfil his engagements and to weaken his personal power. 
Constant struggles ensued between him and Berthold of Mainz, the 
leader of the constitutional party. In 1502 fresh concessions were 
extorted from the king. A Council of Regency (Retchsregiment) 
was entrusted with the chief executive power, and its composition 
was based on representation of the estates. Six circles were formed, 
each of which sent a count anda bishop to the Council. Austria 
and the Netherlands sent two representatives and later two deputies 
from the cities were admitted. ‘The president was chosen by the 


A.D. 1498-1519. REIGN OF MAXIMILIAN I. ZL 


emperor. Maximilian was by no means sincere in this ‘reform. 
He set himself to gain over a party among the princes, and be!ore 
long the Council of Regency ceased to sit, though it was revived in 
the next reign. The only other important change effected under 
Maximilian was the extension of the division into circles, which 
had been primarily adopted to regulate representation in the 
imperial chamber. About 1514 Germany was divided into ten 
circles, viz.. Franconia, Bavaria, Swabia, the Upper Rhine, and 
Lower Saxony, the six circles formed in 1495, with Brandenburg 
and Saxony, the Rhenish electorates, Austria and Burgundy. In 
each of these a captain was appointed to enforce the execution of 
the laws. 

Maximilian’s foreign politics, which play so great a part in his 
personal history, concern the history of Italy or of France rather 
than of Germany. His reign is remarkable for two things, the 
reforms in the empire to which he was distinctly opposed, and 
the advance of the house of Hapsburg, to which he greatly contri- 
buted. By his own marriage he obtained Franche-Comté and the 
Netherlands, over which he retained his hold in spite of great 
difficulties. By marrying his son Philip to Joanna, the daughter 
of Herdinand and Isabella, he not only secured an important 
alliance but prepared for his descendants the Spanish succession. 
He recovered the Austrian provinces from Hungary. He stipulated 
by treaties for the Hapsburg succession in Hungary and Bohemia, 
and facilitated it in 1516 by marrying his grandson Ferdinand to 
Anne, the daughter of Wladislaus. 

For the empire Maximilian did little. He did not re-establish 
his authority in Italy; or enforce it in Switzerland. Jle could not 
even obtain from the pope that coronation which would give him 
the legal title of emperor. But in 1502 he assumed the title with- 
out the ceremony, and thus set an example which was followed by 
his successors. In 1519, Maximilian I. died, and Germany entered 
upon a new epoch. 


III. France From 1453 ro 1494. 


§ 11. TheFrench monarchy grew up from very humble beginnings. 
The early Capet kings had exercised direct power only over Paris 
and the surrounding country. The great territorial lords had 
hardly acknowledged a nominal allegiance. But gradually the 
crown had extended its judicial power and encroached on baronial 
independence. One after another the great provinces fell in and 
were conquered. The English wars, which seemed at one time to 
jeopardise the very existence of France, ultimately strengthened 


22 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. 1. 


both the national unity and the royal power. Charles VII., with 
little ability of his own, was enabled by circumstances to do more 
for the monarchy than any of his predecessors. ‘The gradual 
expulsion of the English, which was completed in 1453, gave him 
a firm hold on popular affection ; while the necessity for peace and 
order generated a desire to increase the power of the crown. In 14389 
the States-General of Orleans gave the king the right to form the 
gens @ordonnance, the first germ of astanding army. To support this 
force he was allowed to levy and collect a perpetual tax, the taille. 
Thus the control of the purse, the essential basis of constitutional 
rights, was surrendered of their own accord by the national repre- 
sentatives. A revolt on the part of the nobles was put down, 
and Charles VII., dying in 1461, left the crown to his eldest son 
Louis XI. 

Of the old French territorial fiefs, Brittany alone retained its 
independence. Butas the fiefs had fallen in, a dangerons custom 
prevailed of granting them out again to members of the royal 
family. Thus was founded the great house of Burgundy, which 
came to rival and almost to overshadow the power of the monarchy. 
John II, gave the duchy of Burgundy in 1363 to his fourth son 
Philip. By marriage Philip obtained Flanders, Artois, and the 
county of Burgundy. His grandson, Philip the Good, made further 
acquisitions. Brabant, Holland, Zealand, Hainault, Luxemburg and 
a number of other provinces which afterwards formed the Nether- 
lands, were brought under his rule. By allying himself with 
England, Philip rendered possible Henry V.’s conquest or France. 
Charles VII. had to purchase his support at the Treaty of Arras 
(1435), by ceding to him Picardy and the border-towns on the 
Somme. 

By a series of rash acts on his accession, Louis XI. alienated 
almost all the French nobles. But his most serious quarrel was 
with Burgundy. By gaining over the ministers of Philip the Good, - 
he procured the restitution of the Somme towns on payment of 
400,000 crowns. ‘lhis roused the bitter hostility of Charles of 
Charolais, Philip’s son and heir. In his wrath, Charles drove his 
father’s ministers from court, and joined the League of the Public 
Weal, which was formed by the French nobles to restrict the royal 
power. The other chief members of the league were Charles of 
Berry, the king’s brother, and the dukes of Brittany and Bourbon. 
Louis XI. at once attacked Bourbon, but meanwhile his other 
enemies surrounded Paris. Hurrying back, Louis fought an 
indecisive battle at Mont Vhéry, and entered the capital. But he 
was compelled to yield the demands of the league at the peace of 
Conflans (1465). Charles of Berry was to receive the important 


A.D. 1461-1483. FRANCE UNDER LOUIS XI. wes 


duchy of Normandy, the loss of which would cripple the monarchy, 
Charles the Bold recovered the Somme towns. 

§ 12. This great defeat taught Louis to employ diplomacy rather 
than force, and to divide his enemies instead of uniting them by 
aggression, A quarrel between the dukes of Verry and Brittany 
enabled him to recover Normandy. But from the first he recognised 
his great enemy in Charles the Bold, who in 1467 became duke of 
Burgundy by the death of his father. ’o weaken him Louis stirred , 
up the town of Liege to frequent revolts. But in 1468 he 
incautiously placed himself in his rival’s power at Perronne, and 
was again compelled to sign an ignominious treaty. He had to 
assist in person at the reduction of Liége, and to cede the provinces 
of Champagne and Brie to Charles of Berry. But seeing the danger 
of allowing his brother to fall under the influence of Burgundy, 
Louis induced him to accept instead the duchy of Guienne. 

A new war between France and Burgundy was soon commenced 
by the intrigues of a French jarty which wished to force on a 
marriage of Charles the Bold’s daughter with Charles of Guienne. 
The latter had lost the prospect of succession to the throne by the 
birth of a dauphin in 1471. The projectod marriage would have 
placed Louis in a dangerous position, but he was saved by the op- 
portune death of his brother in 1472. Guienne now reverted to 
the crown, and a truce was made with Charles the Bold, which 
events converted into a peace. 

The year 1472 marks a complete change in the policy of Charles 
the Bold. Hitherto he had played the part of an independent 
French vassal, and his chief object had been the weakening of the 
royal power. Henceforth he devotes his attention to his German 
provinces, and seeks to consolidate his disjointed dominions into a 
powerful kingdom. [rom Sigismund of Tyrol, a member of the 
house of [Hapsburg, he had obtained Hlsass and tne Breisgau in 1469, 
and soon afterwards he annexed the province of Guelders. In 1478 
he had an interview at Trier with Frederick 11I., by whom he hoped 
to be madea king, but the cautious emperor escaped by night down 
the Moselle. In the next year Charles laid siege to Neuss on the 
Rhine, of which river he hoped to make himself master. When at 
Jast he was compelled to raise the siege, he employed his troops in 
conquering Lorraine, the province which was required to unite the 
Netherlands with Burgundy. 

All this time the hostility of Louis XJ. was none the less active 
that it was not displayed in open war. He stirred up Frederick III. 
and the German princes to defend Neuss. He urged Sigismund of 
Tyrol to reclaim Elsass. But his greatest success lay in convincing 
the Swiss, partly by argument and partly by bribes, that Charles’ 


24 MODERN EUROPE. Car, 1. 


progress was dangerous to their independence. To divert the at- 
tention of the French king, Charles induced Edward IV. to invade 
France, but the indolent English king was bought off by the treaty 
of Pecquigny (1475). The Swiss bad attacked Burgundy during 
the siege of Neuss, and in the attempt to avenge this insult, Charles 
the Bold wrecked his power. He suffered crushing defeats at 
Granson and Morat, and the victorious Swiss aided Réné II. to 
recover Lorraine. In a desperate effort to retake Nancy, the capital 
of the duchy and the intended capital of the kingdom he dreamt of 
forming, Charles the Bold was killed on January 5th, 1477. His 
heir was his only daughter, Mary. 

Louis, overjoyed at the death of his rival, set to work to reap 
advantage from the’event. His most feasible plan would have been 
to marry Mary of Burgundy to the dauphin or to some prince of the 
royal house. But this would not satisfy the jubilant king, who 
determined to break up the Burgundian power altogether. His 
plan was to annex all the French territories to the crown, and to 
divide the German provinces among friendly German priuces. He 
at once seized the Somme towns, the duchy of Burgundy, and great 
part of Artois. But this avowed hostility drove Mary into a 
marriage with Maximilian, Frederick III.’s son, who at once armed 
in defence of his wife’s dominions. ‘The war, distinguished only by 
the indecisive battle of Guinegate, was ended by the treaty of Arras 
(1482) after Mary’s death. Maximilian’s daughter, Margaret, was 
promised in marriage to the dauphin Charles, and Artois and the 
county of Burgundy were to form her dowry. Margaret was sent 
to be bronght up in France. 

Louis XI. was already worn out by disease, and he died in 1488. 
His reign marks an epoch in the history of France, and especially 
in the history of the monarchy. The last great revolt of the feudal 
barons was completely put down. By annexing Burgundy, and the 
county of Provence, Louis extended the territorial power of the 
crown. By the acquisition of Roussillon from John II. of Aragon 
he gave France a strong frontier on the side of the Pyrenees. By 
his alliance with the Swiss, he procured for the monarchy the 
support of the first military power of the day. By instituting 
regular posts, he improved the communication between the different 
parts of the kingdom, and gave increased centralisation to the 
government. At the same time he systematically depressed the 
nobles by the elevation to office of members of the lower classes. 
His personal character presents a curious combination of great 
political ability with the weakest superstition. His reign terminated 
the middle ages in France, and gave that country a modern ad- 
Ministrative system. 


7 


A.D. 1483-1491. REGENCY OF ANNE OF BEAUJEU. 25 


§ 13. Charles VIII. succeeded his father at the age of twelve. 
During his minority, the government was placed by the States 
General in the hands of his sister, Anne of Beaujeu. She followed 
out with equal ability and success her father’s policy. A revolt of the 
nobles, headed by the duke of Orleans, was suppressed, and the duke, 
although heir apparent to the crown, was imprisoned. To prevent 
the nobles from receiving aid from Richard IIJ., Anne encouraged 
Henry ‘Tudor in the invasion of England which ended in the battle 
of Bosworth (1485). The regent also prepared the way for the 
annexation of the last of the great French provinces. Francis I. of 
Brittany died in 1488, leaving the duchy to lis daughter Anre. 
Her hand was sought and obtained by Maximilian, who was married 
to her by proxy. But Anne of Beaujeu saw the danger to I'rance of 
such a union, and by a well-timed invasion of Brittany compelled 
the duchess to marry Charles VIII. Thus a double wrong was 
done to Maximilian ; his wife was taken from him, and his daughter 
Margaret, who had been brought up in France as its destined queen, 
was ignominiously sent back., As soon as he had settled affairs in 
Austria, he armed for a war with France. 

The regency now came to an end, and Charles assumed the 
government of his kingdom. The strength which France had attained 
under his father and sister, Charles determined to employ in the 
enforcement of dynastic claims in Italy. But first he had to settle 
the differences with his neighbours so as to avoid attack during his 
absence. Henry VII., alienated by the annexation of Brittany, was 
conciliated by the treaty of Etaples (1492). With Maximilian 
Charles concluded the peace of Senlis (1493), by which Margaret’s 
dowry, Artois and Franche-Comté, were restored. To Ferdinand ot 
Aragon Charles ceded the disputed province of Roussillon by the 
treaty of Barcelona (1493). Having thus, as he thought, secured 
France from danger, he crossed ihe Alps on his way to Naples in 
September, 1494. 


IV. Spain From 1453 ro 1521. 


§ 14. It was not till the end of the 15th century that Spain began 
to assume the position of a European power. Hitherto all its energies 
had been absorbed in the great contest with the Moors. ‘The 
contest had not resulted in the union of the Christian inhabitants of 
the peninsula. On the contrary, the various provinces, Navarre, 
Aragon, Castile and Portugal, remained obstinately opposed to each 
other. And within each province there was equal disunion. 
Liberty had been developed earlier and more completely in Spain 
than elsewhere. Jn Castile and Aragon the Cortes possessed great 

3% 


26 MODERN EUROPE. Oar. 1. 


power, and in the latter kingdom there existed an officer called the 
Justiza, whose authority almost overshadowed that of the Crown. 
But it was fatal to Spain that the interests of classes always clashed. 
‘specially destructive were the quarrels between the nobles and the 
citizen class. It was certain .that as soon as the monarchy was 
strong enough to take advantage of these divisions, it could crush 
constitutional liberty. 

The little kingdom of Navarre, in the north-eastern corner of the 
peninsula, is important only asa link between France and Spain. 
At the opening of this period it had become connected with Aragon, 
through the marriage of Blanche, heiress of Navarre, with John, 
viceroy of Aragon for his brother Alfonso V. They had one son, 
Charles of Viana, who on his mother’s death ought to have 
inherited the crown of Navarre. But he was kept out by his 
father, who was under the influence of a second wife Joanna 
Henriquez. ‘he result was a war between father and son, which 
was ended by the sudden death of Charles of Viana in 1461, not 
without suspicions of poison. The prince, whose early death was 
much lamented by his subjects, left two sisters, Blanche and 
Eleanor. ‘The elder was imprisoned at Orthez, where she was 
poisoned in 1464, Eleanor, the reputed murderess, was married to 
Gaston de Foix, and brought Navarre to her husband’s family. But 
- the kingdom again passed into female hands, and through a grand- 


daughter of Eleanor'’s, it came under the rule of the house of d’Albret, - 


from whom it.was conquered in 1512 by Ferdinand the Catholic. 

Aragon, on the death of Alfonso V., passed to his brother John II. 
His reign was a period of incessant warfare. The province of 
Catalonia had been united to Aragon in 1187, but never thoroughly 
amalgamated. ‘lhe Catalans bad been warm partisans of Charles of 
Viana. They rebelled against John, and besieged his wife in 
Barcelona. ‘To obtain assistance from France, John pledged the 
counties of Roussillon and Cerdagne to Louis XI.. As the pledge 
was not redeemed, the provinces were annexed to France till their 
restitution in 1493 by the treaty of Barcelona. he Catalans 
offered the crown to René of Anjou, and he accepted it for his son 
John of Calabria, the knight-errant of the 15th century. He 
appeared in Catalonia and was crowned, but his adventurous career 
was closed by his death in 1470. In 1472 John II. suppressed the 
rebellion and re-entered Barcelona. He became involved in a war 
with France for the re-conquest of Roussillon, but was unsuccessful, 
and died at an advanced age in 1479. . The crown of Aragon fell to 
Terdinand, the son of the second wife. 

In Castile the year 1454 witnessed the death of John IL, patron 
of the famous but unfortunate minister, Alvaro de Luna. His son 


tt i i ee — 


a 


A.D. 1479-1504. SPAIN UNDER FERDINAND. 27 


and successor Henry LY. received the nickname of the Impotent, 
and his reign is one scene of anarchy. He divorced his first wife 
Blanche of Navarre, and married Joanna, sister of Alfonso V. of 
Portugal. In 1462 the queen gave birth to a daughter Joanna, but 
there was a general conviction that she was illegitimate. So strong 
was this feeling that the nobles forced Henry to disinherit her in 
favour of his brother Alfonso.. When the king tried to break this 
agreement, a party of the nobles deposed him with theatrical pomp 
at Avila, and declared Alfonso king in lis place. <A civil war 
ensued, in the midst of which Alfonso died (1468). Henry IV. was 
again acknowledged, but on condition that the crown should pass, 
after his death, to his sister Isabella. In 1469 Isabella married 
Ferdinand, son of John II. of Aragon. The marriage was 
displeasing to the king and to many of the Castilians ; and a new 
effort was made to secure the crownto Joanna. But on Henry IV.’s 
death in 1474, Isabella was raised to the throne, and though Joanna’s 
uncle, Alfonso V. of Portugal, armed in defence of his niece he was 
completely unsuccessful. 

§ 15. The marriage of Ferdinand and Isabella created the unity of 
Spain. In 1479 the former succeeded his father in Aragon, and 
the most important kingdoms of the peninsula were brought under 
one government. To cement the newly-formed union, and to 
divert the attention of malcontent subjects, the new monarchs 
embarked in a grand crusade against the Moors, who still held the 
southern districts of Spain. In 1492 the war was brought to a 
triumphant end by the conquest of Granada, an event which did 
more than anything else to give strength to the central government. 
But the subject population was the reverse of homogeneous. 
The policy of the sovereigns was to base political upon religious 
unity. ‘lo this policy was due the establishment of the famous 
Inquisition, which was sanctioned by a bull of Sixtus IV. in 1482. 
The Inquisition, in spite of its religious duties, was a royal rather 
than a papal institution, and in later times it was employed asa 
formidable and efficient support of despotism. But it was fatal to 
‘the real greatness of Spain. The two most industrious and 
progressive elements of its population, the Jews and the Moors, were 
either expelled or crushed by religious persecution. 

In spite of these blots on their policy, the reign of Ferdinand and 
Isabella is a great epoch in the history of Spain. Geographical 
discoveries gave them magnificent dominions in the new world. 
People began to speculate as to the probable heir of this magnificent 
inheritance. There were five children of the marriage, a son, John, 
and four daughters, Isabella, Joanna, Catharine, and Mary. The 
daughters were used as instruments of foreign policy. A natural 


28 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. Te 


object was the union of Portugal with the rest of Spain. ‘To 
facilitate this Isabella was married to Alfonso, prince of Portugal. 
On his death, the widow was married to his kinsman, Emmanuel, 
who became king of Portugal in 1495, Isabella herself died in 
giving birth to a child in 1498, but to keep up the connection with 
Spain, Emmanuel was induced to marry her youngest sister, Mary. 
The second daughter, Joanna, became the wife of Philip, only son 
of Maximilian, and this important marriage brought to the 
Hapsburgs the crown of Spain. Catharine was married to Arthur, 
eldest son of Henry VII., and after his death to his brother, 
Henry VIII. '’o cement the alliance with the Hapsburgs, Ferdi- 
nand and Isabetla brought about a marriage between their only son, 
John, and Margaret, Maximilian’s daughter, formerly betrothed to 
Charles VIII. of France. But John died a few months afterwards 
(1497), and Margaret gave birth to a dead child. These events 
left the succession to the daughters, and, on the death of the eldest, 
to Joanna, the wife of the Archduke Philip. 

In 1504 Ferdinand was brought into grave difficulties by 
Tsabella’s death. She had left to Ferdinand the regency of Castile 
for their daughter, Joanna; but it was doubtful whether this would 
be endured by Joanna’s husband. Philip and Joanna came over 
from the Netherlands in 1505, and the former, supported by a large 
party among the nobles, compelled his father-in-law to resign the 
regency, and to withdraw to Aragon. But in the course of the 
next year Philip died, leaving two infant children, Charles and 
Ferdinand, both destined to play a great part in history. Joanna’s 
intellect, never very powerful, was completely overclouded by her 
husband’s death, and Ferdinand was enabled to resume the govern- 
ment of Castile. In his wrath at Philip’s conduct, and his anxiety 
to keep him out of the succession to Aragon, he had concluded a 
second marriage in 1505 with Germaine de Foix. But there were 
no children by the marriage. 

As king of Sicily, Ferdinand was closely connected with Italian 
politics. In 1504, his general, Gonsalvo de Cordova had conquered 
Naples. Cardinal Ximenes, the greatest of Spanish subjects, made 
extensive annexations on the coast of Africa, and in 1512 Ferdi- 
nand himself annexed Navarre. Thus the Spanish inheritance 
became more extensive and imposing than ever. In his later days 
Ierdinand began to feel jealous of his successor. He even cherished 
the idea of disinheriting his elder in favour of his younger grandson, 
but nothing came of it. In 1515 the Catholic king died$ and 
Charles I. became king of Spain, while his mother, Joanna, though 
still living, was disregarded by her own son. . 

§ 16. In the next few years Srain passed through an important 


A.D. 1515. ACCESSION OF CHARLES TI. IN SPAIN. 29 


crisis. ‘The energeticand centralised government of Ferdinand and 
Isabella had aroused grave discontent, especially among the nobles. 
The accession of a young and inexperienced prince seemed to offer a 
favourable opportunity of regaining the privileges and the in- 
dependence that had been lost. Had they succeeded, the newly- 
formed unity of Spain must have perished. From this the country 
was saved by the zeal and energy of one man, Cardinal Ximenes, 
Archbishop of Toledo. He undertook the government, put down the 
malcontent nobles, and enabled Charles to receive the crown with 
its powers undiminished. For these invaluable services he was 
treated with more than royal ingratitude, and he died in 1517 
without seeing the prince for whom he had saved a kingdom. 

Charles I. of Spain, afterwards the emperor Charles V., had been 
born at Ghent in 1500. He had been brought up in the Nether- 
lands, without any knowledge of other countries, and surrounded 
by flatterers. This education obscured, though it did not destroy, 
his natural talents for government. He soon undid all the work of 
Ximenes. By his reckless promotion of Flemish favourites he 
disgusted the nobles, by his despotism and his demands for money 
he alienated the citizens. ‘The general discontent found expression 
in 1521 in a great rebellion of the Spanish communes. J[ortunatcly 
for the king the old jealousies between nobles and citizens prevented 
any union between them, the rebellion was put down, and its heroic 
leader, Juan de Padilla, was executed in 1521. But before this 
date Charles had been elected to the empire, and Spain entered 
- upon a wholly new position in Europe. 


V. OTTOMAN EMPIRE, 1458-1520. 


§ 17. The Ottoman Turks established an independent power in 
Asia Minor, on the ruins of the Seljukian empire. Internal disputes 
among the Greeks gave them their first footing in Europe-in the 
middle of the fourteenth century. From this time their progress 
was incessant. Gradually the Greek emperors lost all their domin- 
ions except their capital, Constantinople, which was saved only by 
the strength of its position. In 1402 the city must have fallen but 
for the defeat of the Sultan Bajazet I. at Angora, by the Tartars 
under Timour. The Turks recovered their shaken power with 
marvellous rapidity. In 1453, Mohammed II., the seventh of the 
sultans, and the greatest conqueror of his age, took Constantinople, 
and the last of the Greek emperors, Constantine Paleologus, 
perished in a heroic defence of his capital. The cause of the 
Turkish successes in Europe is to be found, partly in the self- 
sacrificing heroism inspired by their religion, but still more in the 


30 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. I. 


superiority of their civil and military administration. This was 
based on their employment of slaves. Besides the captives taken 
in war, a regular tax of children was imposed on the conquered 
peoples. These children were subjected to a rigorous education, 
comparable only to that of the Jesuits. As they grew up they 
were divided into two classes. ‘hose who showed intellectual 
vigour were drafted into the civil service, where they formed a body 
of perfectly trained and submissive administrators. ‘Those who 
were distinguished by physical strength were added to the famous 
corps of Janissaries, long the backbone of the Turkish armies. It 
_was this complete organisation, under the absolute control of a 
single will, which made the Turks so vastly superior to the 
imperfectly united nations of Europe. 

The fall of Constantinople made a profound impression in Europe. 
The bolder and more sanguine spirits urged the union of the 
western princes in a new crusade. But it was soon evident that 
the age of crusades was long past. Special and national interests 
were too absorbing to allow the various nations to combine even for 
a common object. It soon became evident that resistance to the 
Turks would be left to those powers which were most immediately 
affected. And even they were in no hurry to provoke a conflict. 
The Venetians, afraid of interruption to their commerce, concluded 
a treaty with the Sultan in 1454. 

Mohammed IJ. showed no immediate eagerness to extend his 
conquests. His first care was to settle the government of his new 
capital. He did all in his power to encourage the Greeks to reside. 
He promised his protection to the neighbouring princes who were 
willing to pay tribute. But even had he wished to stop short in 
the work of conquest, events were too strong to allow him to do go. 
From 1455 onwards his reign was one of ceaseless military activity, 
of which it is only possible to give a brief summary. He annexed 
the province of Servia, but his further progress westwards was 
arrested by the relief of Belgrad in 1456. In the south he was more 
successful. ‘The duchy of Athens was taken from the Florentine 
family of Acciajuoli. George and Demetrius, two survivors of the 
house of Paleologus, were driven out of the Morea, and the whole of 
the peninsula was annexed except the few possessions of Venice. One 
after another Lesbos and other islands in the Augean were conquered. 
Successful resistance was made only by the knights of Rhodes, the 
outpost of Christendom, and by Scanderbeg, the Albanian hero. 
All this time Mohammed II. was engaged in constant wars in Asia 
Minor, where he conquered the prince of Caramania, the old rival of 
the Ottomans. The Sultan was also occupied with the reduction of 
the Danubian principalities. In 1462 he annexed Wallachia. In 


a a 


A.D. 1453-1481. CONQUESTS OF MOHAMMED II. ol 


the next year he overran Herzegovina and Montenegro, and in 1464 
he completed the conquest of the kingdom of Bosnia. Further 
acquisitions in this direction were prevented by the military 
activity of Hungary under Matthias Corvinus. Matthias might 
have been able to drive the Turks backwards, had he not been 
diverted from the enterprise by his wars with Bohemia and 
Austria. 

The progress of the Turks and the entreaties of Pope Pius II. 
at last drew Venice into the war which it had hitherto shunned. 
But the war was as unsuccessful as the former peace had been 
discreditable. Negropont and other Venetian possessions in Greece 
were conquered. The death of Scanderbeg in 1467 not only 
deprived the Republic of its most valuable ally, but hampered it 
with the defence of Albania. ‘The fortresses of Kroja and Scutari 
were consequently besieged and in 1479 Venice had to conclude 
the peace of Constantinople, by which Albania and most of the 
Greek territories were surrendered, and the rest were held under 
Turkish suzerainty. Mohammed II. now organised an Italian ex- 
pedition, which took Otranto in 1480, and caused a new feeling of 
alarm. But Otranto was restored in the next year on account of 
the death of Mohammed II. at the age of fifty-one. 

§ 18. The Turkish throne was now contested by Mohammed’s two 
sons Bajazet and Djem. Bajazet succeeded in defeating his younger 
but more capable brother, who fell into the hands of the knights of 
Rhodes. The Sultan, anxious to get rid of his formidable rival, 
paid the knights 45,000 ducats a year to keep him a prisoner, In 
1489 the unfortunate Djem passed into the keeping of the pope, 
Innocent VIII., who received still larger sums from Bajazet. 
Alexander VI. was compelled to surrender his captive to Charles 
VIII., but was suspected of being bribed to poison him beforehand. 
At any rate Djem died in 1495, and Bajazet at last felt his throne 
to be secure. 

Bajazet II. presents a curious contrast to his predecessors and 
successors. With some interest in literature, he was averse to war, 
and during his reign there was a lull in Turkish ageression. But 
the military activity of his subjects compelled him occasionally to 
divert his attention from peaceful pursuits. He reduced a revolt in 
Bosnia, and overran Croatia. He was also involved in a war with 
Venice which was ended by a peace in 1502. The Turks were 
disgusted with their indolent ruler. The Janissaries began to show 
that turbulence which was afterwards so fatal to the empire. 
Bajazet’s son, Selim, was the favourite of the soldiers. Supported 
by them, he deposed his father, who died of poison (1512). Selim 
I. commenced his reign with the murder of all his brothers, a 


52 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. 1. 


practice which became. the invariable concomitant of each sultan’s 
accession. 

§ 19. Under Selim I., a ferocious and warlike prince, the Turks 
resumed that career. of conquest, which had been interrupted since 
the death of Mohammed II. From 1514 to 1516 he was engaged 
in a war with the Persians, and conquered Mesopotamia. ‘I'he 
Persians were Mohammedans, but of the sect of the Shiites, who 
showed especial reverence to Ali, Mohammed’s son-in-law, and 
regarded him as the lawful successor of the prophet. ‘The orthodox 
Mohammedans, or Sonnites, to whom the ‘Turks belonged, acknow- 
ledged the intermediate Caliphs, Abou Bekir, Omar and Othman, 
who ruled before Ali. They regarded the Shiites with far greater 
abhorrence than they did the Christian heretics. In 1516 Selim 
attacked and conquered Syria. He then turned his arms against 
Egypt, where the ancient Caliphs still retained a shadow of their 
former power, at once ruled and protected by the Mamelukes. 
Egypt was speedily reduced, and the last of the Abasside Caliphs, 
Motawakkel, was removed to die in obscurity in Constantinople. 
From this time the Turkish sultans were regarded as the successors 
to the Caliphate, and thus became the spiritual as well as the temporal 
heads of Islam. Egypt was by far the most important Turkish 
conquest since that of Constantinople. It gave the last blow to the 
commerce of Venice by securing to the Turks the absolute control of 
the Levant. Soon after this great success, as he was planning an 
attack upon Rhodes, Selim I. died of the plague (1520). His son and 
successor, Solyman the Magnificent, became the able rival of the 
great European princes of the 16th century. 


CHAPTER II. 
WARS IN ITALY, 1494-1519. 


§ 1. Possible claimants to the crown of Naples; Charles VIII.’s invasion 
solicited by revolted barons and by Lodovico Sforza. § 2. Rapid success 
of the French in Italy; league formed against them; Charles’ return ; 
battle of Fornovo. § 3. Loss of Naples by the French; death of 
Charles VIII. § 4. Louis XII. conquers Milan ; partition of Naples 
with Spain; French expelled from Naples by Gonsalvo de Cordova. 
§ 5. Alexander VI. and Cesar Borgia: reduction of Romagna; death 
of the Pope and fall of Cesar. § 6. Julius II.; the League of Cambray ; 
the Holy League; the French lose Milan; death of Louis XII. and of 
Julius II. § 7. Florence under Savonarola; his fall; Soderini genfa- 
lonier for life; restoration of the Medici. § 8. Francis I. invades 
Italy ; battle of Marignano; conquest of Milan; treaty between 
Francis and Leo X. 


§ 1. Tue tyranny of Ferdinand of Naples and his son Alfonso of 
Calabria provoked a rebellion among the Neapolitan barons (1485), 
which had important ultimate results. The claims advanced by 
the popes to the suzerainty of Naples gave them frequent causes of 
quarrel with the king, and Innocent VIII. supported the insurgents. 
It was decided to bring forward a claimant to the throne in 
opposition to Ferdinand. ‘There were two families from which such 
a claimant might be chosen, those of Aragonand Anjou. Ferdinand 
of Aragon, the lawful son of John II., might claim Naples against 
his bastard cousin. In the house of Anjou, the old héné of Pro- 
vence had died in 1480, and his only descendant was Réné of 
Lorraine, the son of his daughter Yolande. But the elder Réné 
had disinherited his grandson, and had left his possessions and 
claims to his nephew, Charles of Maine. ‘The latter had died in 
1481 after making a will in favour of Louis XI. By the wills, 
therefore, of Réné le Bon and Charles of Maine, their rights, such 
as they were, to the crown of Naples might be claimed by Charles 
VIII. But the Neapolitans do not appear to have recognised these 
wills, and the crown was offered to Réné of Lorraine. He was at 
this time at the French court endeavouring to establish his claim. 
- to his grandfather’s county of Provence. In this hopeless pursuit 
he wasted the time which might have given him the throne of 


34 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. IL. 


Naples. Vessels waited for him in vain at Genoa, and at last the 
barons surrendered on promise of a complete amnesty. In defiance 
of this promise, they were seized and shut up in prison, from which 
few of them came out alive. A small number of nobles, who had 
declined to put their faith in princes, remained in exile, and were 
impelled by the fate of their comrades to take vigorous measures 
of revenge. ‘'lheir leaders were the princes of Salerno and Bisignan, 
the heads of the house of San Severino. ‘They repaired to Venice, 
now as ever the enemy of Naples, and asked advice as to whom 
they should appeal to for aid. The choice lay between Réné of 
Lorraine, the hereditary Angevin claimant, Charles VIIJ., who 
claimed to represent the same family by the wills of Réné I. and 
his nephew, and Ferdinand the Catholic, the representative of the 
legitimate Aragonese line. Réné had shown his incapacity, the 
Venetians feared any increase of the maritime power of Spain, 
so by their advice it was determined to apply to France, whither 
the prince of Salerno proceeded in 1492. 

Meanwhile events occurred elsewhere to facilitate the French 
invasion. Lodovico Sforza was still scheming to supplant his 
nephew in the duchy of Milan. But Gian Galeazzo had married 
Isabella, daughter of Alfonso of Calabria, who was likely to inter- 
fere on behalf of his son-in-law. Lodovico, therefore, looked round 
for allies who might assist him in a possible war against Naples. The 
Medici were the oldest allies of the Sforzas, but the rash conduct of 
Piero de Medici convinced Lodovico that he would probably find 
Florence hostile. This compelled him to look outside Italy. His 
immediate object was to hamper the Neapolitan rulers so as to 
prevent their interference in the affairs of Milan. This might be 
done by a French invasion, though he had no desire or expectation 
that Naples would be conquered. In 1493 he sent to the French 
court Galeazzo da San Severino, a relative of the prince of Salerno, 
to co-operate with him in urging on the invasion. 
~ Charles VIII. was at this time under the influence of two low- 
born ministers, Etienne de Vers and Guillaume Briconnet, both of 
whom were won over by the Italian envoys. The duke of Bourbon 
and the most prominent nobles of France endeavoured to dissuade 
the king, but in vain. In 1494 Charles advanced to Lyons, and 
thence crossed the Alps by Mont Genévre. Milan was his ally 
and Venice was neutral, so that he met with no opposition in 
northern Italy. Lodovico Sforza obtained the object of his intrigues. 
Gian Galeazzo died suddenly at Piacenza, and his uncle was 
accepted as duke of Milan. ‘he French troops in Romagna warded 
off danger from Naples. Gian Galeazzo left an infant son, Francesco, 
but he was passed over. 


A.D. 1494.. FRENCH INVASION OF NAPLES. 30 


§ 2. There were three advantageous points for resistance to an 
army invading Italy, at the entrances into Tuscany, the Papal 
States, and the kingdom of Naples. The passes of the Appennines 
which divide Lombardy from Tuscany were commanded by Floren- 
tine fortresses, but no measures were taken for their defence. This 
was the result of a misunderstanding between Piero de Medici and 
his subjects. The Florentines were attached to the French alliance 
both by commercial connection and by old Guelf traditions, 
They were alienated, therefore, by Piero’s close relations with the 
rulers of Naples. The party of opposition to the Medici rule was 
immensely strengthened by foreign politics. They had already 
opened a connection with the French king before he entered Italy. 
When Charles had advanced as far as Pisa, Piero made a sudden 
resolution to save himself from domestic sedition by a complete 
change of policy. He made his way to the French camp, and 
agreed to cede, not only Pisa, but Leghorn, Sarzana, Sarzanello and 
Pietrasanta. This complete abandonment of their interests was 
even more exasperating to the Florentines than his previous 
opposition to the French. On his return to the city, Piero found 
that a revolt had begun. He fled to Venice, his family was 
exiled, and a republic was proclaimed in Florence. Charles VIII. 
now entered the city as its pretended conqueror, and made the most 
extreme demands. But the republican leaders, and notably Piero 
Capponi, showed unexpected spirit, and ultimately a treaty was 
concluded which confirmed the cession of the fortresses, but only on 
condition that they should be restored when Charles entered Naples 
or returned to France. 

In Naples, Ferdinand I. had died before the French invasion in 
January, 1494. His son and successor, Alfonso I., who had 
obtained unmerited repute as a commander through his boasted 
expulsion of the Turks from Otranto, displayed at the crisis equal 
incapacity and cowardice. He entrusted the command of the 
army to his son Ferdinand, and that of the fleet to his brother 
Frederic of Tarentum. ‘The army was now encamped at Viterbo, 
at the entrance to the Papal States. ‘The eyes of all Italy were 
fixed on this spot in the expectation of a decisive conflict. But 
the French were again favoured by their marvellous good fortune, 
Ferdinand withdrew with his troops to Rome, and Charles VIII. 
entered Viterbo unopposed. He marched thence upon Rome, and 
the enemy again withdrew. Alexander VI. shut himself up in the 
Castle of St. Angelo. Charles refused to listen to those who urged 
him to depose the pope, and was satisfied to extort a treaty, by 
which four papal towns were temporarily ceded to him. At the 
same time Djem, brother of Bajazet I]., was handed over to the 


36 MODERN EUROPE. . CHAP. U- 


French, as a possible instrument in the projected crusade against 
the Turks, and Ceasar Borgia, the pope’s son, became a hostage for 
his father. But Cesar soon escaped, and Djem died, probably of 
poison. 

Alfonso of Naples, terrified at the near approach of the French, 
and conscious that his cruel rule had alienated his subjects, abdi 
cated in favour of his son Ferdinand, who was too young to have 
incurred enmity. Ferdinand II., his father having retired to die in 
Sicily, advanced with his army to San Germano on the frontier, 
which a mountain-pass and the river Garigliano rendered easily 
defensible. But the news of a revolt in Naples compelled him to 
withdraw to the capital, and the French army again met with no 
opposition. ‘The Neapolitan citizens compelled Ferdinand to fly to 
Ischia. Charles VIII. now realised his wildest desires; he entered 
Naples, and was crowned king. 

But the marvellous success of the French arms, which the 
historian Commines calls “a true mystery,” had effected a great 
change in the sentiments of the Italian powers. Lodovico Sforza 
had never anticipated the conquest of Naples, and had reason for 
alarm. Louis of Orleans, Charles’ cousin, who had been left in 
command at Asti on the border of Lombardy, laid claim to Milan 
as the grandson of Valentina Visconti. ‘The French invasion had 
given Milan to Lodovico, it might also deprive him of it. He was 
now as anxious to oppose Charles VIII. as he had previously been 
to befriend him. Venice was roused from its neutrality by the 
threatened establishment of a new and overwhelming power in 
Italy. Foreign princes, too, felt their interests to be at stake. 
Ferdinand of Aragon, as king of Sicily, was opposed to the possession 
of Naples by France. Maximilian was roused by the news that 
Charles VIII. had designs on the empire. The envoys of these 
powers met at Venice. The news that Charles had passed Viterbo 
hastened their deliberations. A league was concluded between 
Milan, Venice, the Pope, Ferdinand and Maximilian, which was 
really directed against I’rance, though its avowed object was only 
mutual protection against attack. 

Meanwhile in Naples Charles’ conduct was unwise and im- 
prudent. He took no pains to conciliate bis new subjects, and 
the nobles, even the Angevin partisans, were especially ill-treated. 
All offices were conferred upon Frenchmen. ‘The news of the 
conclusion of the league at Venice decided Charles to return to 
France. Leaving some of his troops under different commanders 
to uphold French interests, he set out on the land journey. He 
passed through Rome, whence Alexander VI., conscious of fraud, 
fled to Orvieto. Through Siena Charles came to Pisa. Hitherto 


A.D. 1495. EXPULSION OF THE FRENCH. 37 


he had taken no steps to fulfil his treaty with the Florentines. 
He had given liberty to the Pisans, who had been subject to 
Vlorence since 1406, and this was resented by the Florentines. 
Charles’ evil genius on this journey was the count of Ligny, who 
induced him not to surrender the fortresses, but to leave them 
occupied by French garrisons. After thus weakening his army, 
the king proceeded through the Appennines towards Lombardy. 

In northern Italy, the duke of Orleans had determined to 
prosecute his private plans upon the duchy of Milan. Sallying 
out of Asti, he captured Novara. This attack on one cf their 
members gave the league their desired pretext for hostilities. A 
large army was collected at the entrance of Lombardy prepared 
to dispute the passage of the French. Charles VJII. was thus 
compelled to fight a battle at Fornovo, 6 July, 1495. The battle 
was merely a confused skirmish, in which neither side could claim 
a victory. But the French were enabled to continue their journey 
unmolested. The duke of Orleans was left to fight out his own 
quarrel. Charles might have done great injury to Lodovico Sforza 
by espousing the cause of Gian Galeazzo’s infant son. But he 
refused either to assist his cousin or to prejudice his cause in any way. 

§ 3. No sooner was the king’s back turned than affairs in Naples 
began to go badly for the French. Their evil rule did much to 
obliterate from the minds of the natives the misdeeds of their 
former kings. Ferdinand Il. took advantage of this reaction in 
men’s opinions. He received assistance, both men and ships, from 
the king of Aragon, and the Venetian fleet under the marquis of 
Mantua was placed at his disposal. In return for this, he promised 
to cede to Venice five important ports on the Adriatic, including 
Otranto and Brindisi. Returning from exile Ferdinand commenced 
the reconquest of his lost kingdom, One place after another 
opened its gates. The city of Naples received him with enthusiasm, 
though the citadel was for some time held by the French under 
the marquis of Montpensier. At length, as no assistance came 
from France, the citadel was evacuated, and Montpensier with his 
army, after enduring a siege in Atella, surrendered to Ferdinand. 
Calabria held out longest under d’Aubigny, the ablest of the French 
commanders, but he too had to yield. Ferdinand did not live 
long to enjoy his triumph. After marrying his father’s half-sister, 
Joanna, he died suddenly in 1496. He was succeeded by his uncle 
Frederick of Tarentum, the fifth king who had worn the crown of 
Naples within less than three years. 

Meanwhile Charles VIII. was occupied with tournaments and 
other pleasures. In his intervals of leisure he had two Italian 
questious to consider; whether to assist the duke of Orleans, who 


38 MODERN EUROPE. CuaP I. 


was reduced to great straits in Novara, and secondly, how to 
preserve the vanishing French power in Naples. At court there 
were two contending parties. One wished to conclude a peace and 
to withdraw from Italian politics altogether; the other, headed by 
Brigonnet, saw its interest in the prolongation of the war. At last 
the peace party prevailed so far as to open negotiations with 
Lodovico Sforza, and to conclude the treaty of Vercelli. By this 
the duke of Orleans was allowed to quit Novara, and Sforza 
promised to equip two vessels for the relief of the castles of Naples. 
But the latter promise was constantly evaded, and Philippe de 
Commines, a member of the party of peace, failed to persuade 
Venice to accept the treaty. 

“Charles VIII. lived for three years after his return, during which 
he did nothing either for Italy or France. He diced at Amboise in 
April, 1498. His understanding was as feeble as his person was 
deformed, and it was the irony of fate that made such a man the 
conqueror of Italy at a time when that country was in the zenith 
of its civilisation. Charles’ three children had died before him, 
and the crown now fell for the fourth time in French history to a 
collateral line, in the person of Louis of Orleans. By Charles VIII.’s 
death, Brittany was again severed from the crown, as it passed to 
his widow Anne. Louis XII., anxious to recover so important a 
province, induced Alexander VI. to grant him a divorce from his 
wife Jeanne, daughter of Louis XI. This preliminary accomplished, 
Louis at once married Anne of Brittany. 

§ 4. Louis XII.’s accession was an important event for Italy. Not 
only did he inherit his predecessor’s claims to Naples, but ‘he 
possessed a personal claim upon Milan, which he had already 
shown his intention to assert. He was urged on by his minister 
George of Amboise, who had designs on the papacy, which he hoped 
to attain by making his master powerful in Italy. And in Italy 
itself circumstances were favourable to the French. The Venetians, 
always rivals of Milan in northern Italy, were at this time on 
especially bad terms with Lodovico Sforza. Florence was occupied 
in the siege of Pisa, and though it owed its disasters to France, it 
still clung to the French alliance as the only means of recovering 
its losses. Pope Alexander VI. had schemes for the agerandise- 
ment of his son Casar Borgia, which went far beyond the nepotism 
of his predecessors, and he hoped to accomplish them with the 
assistance of France. It was this hope which made him so com- 
pliant in granting Louis’ divorce: he gave the cardinal’s hat to 
George of Amboise, and encouraged his ambitious hopes. To 
Venice Louis promised Cremona and the Ghiara d’Adda, to 
Florence aid against Pisa, and to the pope French troops for the 


‘ 


“AD. 1499, FRENCH CONQUEST OF MILAN. 39° 


conquest of Romagna. Having thus purchased allies, he despatched 
an army across the Alps in 1499. Its success was immediate. 
Lodovico Sforza fled for refuge to the Swiss, and Milan opened its 
gates to the French. Louis now appeared in person to enjoy his 
triumph, and appointed Trivulcio governor of Milan. Trivulcio 
was himself a Milanese citizen, driven into the service of France 
by hostility to Lodovico Sforza. He ruled in the interests of his 
own party, and soon alienated his subjects. Lodovico took 
advantage of this to return to Lombardy, and recovered Milan as 
easily as he had lost it. But the French army strengthened by 
reinforcements renewed the war. ‘The Swiss in Lodovico’s service, 
being forbidden to fight against their fellow-countrymen, were 
compelled to desert him. He was given up to the French and 
imprisoned in the castle of Loches, where he died after ten years’ 
captivity. Thus he expiated his own short-sighted policy in 
calling the French into Tialy. 

Having thus accomplished his first object, Louis turned his at- 
tention to the reduction of Naples. It was in vain that king 
Frederick offered to become the tributary of France. But Ferdinand 
the Catholic had claims upon Naples and Louis was unwilling to 
incur the hostility of Spain. Accordingly, a treaty of partition was 
arranged at Granada (1500). Louis was to have Abruzzi and Terra 
di Lavoro with the title of king, while Ferdinand was to receive 
Apulia and Calabria, the provinces which lay nearest to his own 
kingdom of Sicily. The unscrupulous character of this treaty was 
disguised by the flimsy pretext that the conquest of Naples was 
merely the preliminary of a crusade against the Turks. Frederick of 
Naples, who expected nothing but friendship from the king of Aragon, 
could make no resistance. He surrendered Naples to the French 
in 1501, and ended his life a prisoner in France. 

Thus the first object of the treaty of Granada was attained; the 
partition proved more difficult. A quarrel between the French and 
Spaniards soon developed into open war. The military skill of the 
Spanish commander, Gonsalvo de Cordova, triumphed in every 
contest. Defeated in the battles of Seminara and Cerignola, the 
French were compelled to withdraw, and Naples was annexed to 
Spain (1503). In 1504 a large French army attempted the recovery 
of Naples, but it was completely routed by Gonsalvo on the 
Garigliano. Piero de Medici, who fought on the French side in 
the battle, was drowned in the river. 

§ 5. Meanwhile the papal states had been the scene of momentous 
events. Alexander VI. reaped all the advantages he had hoped to 
gain from the French alliance. Czsar Borgia was his second son, 
and had been destined for promotion in the church. But he soon 


40 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. IT 


wearied of this career, murdered his brother the duke of Gandia, 
and induced the pope to embark in schemes for his temporal ag- 
grandisement. His object was to form a great secular power out 
of the states of the church, The assistance of French troops en- 
abled him to conquer Romagna, which had long been divided 
among a number of practically independent princes. By a policy 
_ of unscrupulous cruelty, Casar succeeded in establishing a strong 
central government in the hitherto distracted province. With an 
unscrupulous ability, which extorted the admiration of Machiavelli, 
he extended his power over the duchy of Urbino, Perugia, and other 
important territories. When his adherents appeared untrustworthy, 
he entrapped them at Sinigaglia and murdered them. His power 
Was supreme in central Italy, and he began to meditate the 
conquest of Tuscany. But he had always to face the danger that 
the two chief supports of his power might fail him. The French 
were not unlikely to become hostile, and his father might die. To 
. make himself independent of France, he took advantage of the 
Neapolitan war to enter into relations with Spain. But his chief 
object was to secure his power against a probable reaction after his 
father’s death. He secured a majority among the cardinals so as 
to dictate the choice of a new pope. All persons in Rome whose 
hostility was feared were removed by poison or the dagger. But 
his carefully devised policy proved a failure. ‘The received account 
of Alexander VI.’s death is that he and his son accidentally drank 
the poison prepared for the Cardinal of Corneto. The pope died, 
and though Cxsar Borgia recovered, his life was for some time in 
danger. ‘This unforeseen accident prevented his taking the necessary 
steps, and enabled his enemies to concert their measures without 
opposition, The choice of the cardinals fell first on Francesco 
Piccolomini, who took the name of Pius III. but died within a few 
days. ‘The cardinals reassembled and elected Giuliano della Rovere, 
a nephew of Sixtus I1V., who became pope with the title of 
. Julius II, The great object of Julius’ ambition was to extend the 
papal power, and he determined to take advantage of Ceesar Borgia’s 
conquests for that purpose. Cesar was imprisoned and compelled 
to surrender his territories to the papacy. On his release he es- 
caped to Naples, where he was betrayed by Gonsalvo de Cordova 
and sent a prisoner to Spain. After three years’ captivity he 
escaped to Navarre, where he perished in a civil war in 1510. 

§ 6. The Borgias had within three years consolidated a power 
whicn they intended to make their own. In this they failed, and 
tne fruits of their success were reaped by the papacy. ‘Thanks to his 
predecessor, Julius II. was a stronger temporal prince than any of 
his predecessors had been. But he was too active and restless to 


AD. 1508-1509. THE LEAGUE OF CAMBRAY. 41 


remain contented with this. He wished to recover all the territory 
to which the papal see could lay claims. Venice was in possession 
of Faenza, Rimini and Ravenna, and Julius was determined to wrest 
them from her. For this purpose he made use of the jealousy with 
which the European princes regarded the republic. The Venetians 
had remained selfishly aloof from the contests in Italy, and had 
sought to aggrandise themselves by means of the disasters of other 
states. Louis XII. of France was anxious to recover Cremona and 
Ghiara d’ Adda, with which he had purchased the Venetian alliance, 
and also Bergamo and Brescia, which had formerly belonged to the 
duchy of Milan. Ferdinand the Catholic resented the loss of the five 
Apulian ports which had been ceded to Venice in 1495 in return 
for assistance in the reconquest of Naples from the French. Maxi- 
milian had old grounds of quarrel with the repubtic, both as 
emperor and as duke of Austria. Julius II. tcok advantage of these | 
various grievances to form a general league against Venice at ~ 
Cambray in 1508. The campaign was begun by the French in 
1509. The Venetian army was defeated at the battle of Agnadello 
or Vaila. Julius IJ. annexed Faenza, Rimini and Ravenna, while 
Otranto, Brindisi and the other ports were regained by Naples. The 
power of Venice seemed on the verge of complete annihilation, but 
it was saved by the quarrels which broke out among its enemies. 
Julius II. had no sooner gained one object than with startling 
suddenness he started in pursuit of another. He had himself been 
an active partisan of Charles VIII., but circumstances had changed, 
and he determined to free Italy from the foreigners. His first 
hostility was directed against the French, but to oppose them he 
had to make use of the power of Spain. In 1510 he absolved the 
Venetians from the interdict he had issued against them, and de- 
tached Ferdinand from the league of Cambray. Thus Italy was 
again convulsed by a new war. At first the pope was unsuccessful. 
A revolt in Bologna gave that city to the French, and Julius returned 
discomfited to Rome. But a hasty move on the part of the French 
king roused him to new vigour. Louis XII. summoned a general 
council at Pisa and threatened to try and depose the pope. This 
interference with ecclesiastical affairs alienated the European princes, 
and Julius II. was enabled to conclude the so-called Holy League 
in October, 1511. Its members were Maximilian, Ferdinand the 
Catholic, Henry VIII. of England and the Swiss. The war begun 
in 1512 with the siege of Bologna, which was saved by the energy 
of the youthful French commander, Gaston de Foix. Bergamo and 
Brescia, which had been seized by Venice, were reconquered by the 
French. Gaston de Foix, raised to the summit of fame by these 
victories, marched towards Rome. On his way he had to fight with 
4 i 


42 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. IL. 


the army of the League at Ravenna, He won aglorious victory, but 
was himself slain at the age of 23. His death was more fatal to 
the French than his victory had been to their enemies. His 
successor, La Palisse, was compelled to retire to Lombardy. 'There 
he was attacked by the Swiss and driven out of Italy into France. 
The duchy of Milan was given to Maximilian Sforza, the eldest son 
of Lodovico, and thus the Swiss thought to repair the wrong they 
had done to the father, But Brescia and Bergamo were restored to 
Venice, and the pope seized upon Parma and Piacenza. 

The loss of Milan was not the only disaster the French had to 
undergo. Ferdinand the Catholic drove John d’Albret from 
Navarre and annexed that kingdom. Henry VIII. and Maxi- 
milian invaded France, took several towns, and routed some 
French troops at Guinegate. To divert the attention. of England 
James IV. of Scotland was induced to cross the border, but he was 
defeated and killed at Flodden. Louis XII. was compelled to make 
peace. In April, 1513, he concluded a truce at Orthez with Fer- 
dinand, leaving Navarre in his hands. Peace was made with 
England in 1514, and Louis married Henry VIII.’s sister Mary. 
He did not long survive the failure of his Italian policy, and died 
1 Jan., 1515. He had been a popular king of France, where his 
easy good nature and his economy had done much to reconcile the 
people to a government which had been built up by harsher measures. 
But he wasted the resources of the country in schemes of aggran— 
disement from which France had little or nothing to gain. 

Before he could witness the final humiliation of France, Julius II. 
had died (21 February, 1513). He was guiltless of the nepotism 
which aroused such enmity against his predecessors. His nephew, 
Francesco della Rovere, obtained Urbino legally as the nephew of 
Guidobaldo Montefeltro. His comparative purity of motive has 
obtained for Julius a reputation which he hardly deserves, His 
restless activity involved Italy in wars which produced no result 
commensurate with the bloodshed. Itis true that the French were 
expelled, but only by establishing the power of the Spaniards. The 
author of the League of Cambray could awaken no national spirit in 
Italy, which might preserve the country from foreign inreads in the 
future. And the spectacle of a pope clad in armour and leading 
troops to the siege or the battle-field, though it was preferable to 
that of a pontiff steeped in degrading sensuality, was not likely to 
reconcile to the papacy the awakening opinion of Europe. 

§ 7. Julius II.’s successor, Leo X., was Giovanni de Medici, the 
second son of Lorenzo the Magnificent. He had been exiled from 
Florence on the downfall of his brother Piero. After that event the 
Florentines had established a republic under the guidance of the great 


A.D. 1515. BATTLE OF MARIGNANO. 43 


reformer Sayonarola. He induced them to form a great council 
on the model of the Venetian constitution. But the republican 
government depended too much for its hold on the people upon the 
continued influence of Savonarola. That influence was weakened 
by disasters in foreign politics, especially by the failure of the 
efforts to recover Pisa. A strong party was formed against the 
preacher, whose character was not robust enough to stand the trials 
of alternate triumph and failure. The Pope, whom he had attacked 
with vehemence, excommunicated him ag a heretic, and in 1498 he 
was executed before the Palazzo Vecchio. Florence continued the 
siege of Pisa, which absorbed the attention and resources of the 
city, but without success. The head of the government was Piero 
Soderini, who had been elected gonfalonier for life. But intrigues 
outside the city and discontent within proved fatal to Florentine 
independence. After the expulsion of the French, Giovanni de 
Medici induced the Spaniards to attack Florence. The city was 
taken (80 August, 1512) and the Medici were restored to power. 
Piero’s son Lorenzo became the ruler of the city under the patronage 
of his uncle Leo X. 

§ 8. As Louis XII. left no sons, the French crown passed to 
Francis, count of Angouléme, a young and ambitious prince. He 
married his predecessor’s daughter Claude, and thus prevented the 
separation of Brittany, of which she was the heiress. Francis I. was 
determined to wrest the duchy of Milan from Maximilian Sforza. 
Collecting an army he crossed the Alps with unexpected rapidity, 
before the Swiss were prepared to oppose him. Like his predecessor, 
Francis I. was supported by the Venetians, and they diverted the 
attention of the Spaniards. Thus the burden of the war fell upon 
the Swiss, who were routed at the two days’ battle of Marignano 
(13 and 14 September, 1515). Genoa had already been captured, 
and Maximilian Sforza now abdicated the duchy of Milan, and 
retired with a pension to France, where he died in obscurity in 15380. 

This third conquest of Milan by the French concluded for a time 
the Italian wars, which had continued without intermission since 
1494, Francis made peace with the Swiss at Freiburg, and 
resumed the old relations with them, which had been interrupted 
by the rashness of Louis XII. With Leo X. Francis had an 
interview at Bologna. Parma and Piacenza were restored to Milan, 
and the king promised to support Lorenzo de Medici in Florence. 
But the most important result of the interview was the Concordat 
of 1516. This abolished the Pragmatic Sanction of 1488, the 
foundation of the independence of the Gallican Church. The powers 
which had been assumed by the national synods under the 
Pragmatic Sanction were now shared between the pope and the 


44 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. I. 


king. The annates, or first year’s revenue of a new benefice, were 
restored to the papacy, but the king obtained the right of 
appointing to ecclesiastical dignities. ‘Thus, the central power of 
the monarchy was established as firmly in the Church as it had 
already been in the state. 

Ferdinand the Catholic was alarmed at the re-establishment of the 
French power in Italy. Dreading an attack upon Naples, he tried 
to form a new European league against France. But his death in 
1516 gave the Spanish crown to his grandson Charles, with whom 
Francis J. concluded the treaty of Noyon. Thus Italy enjoyed a 
brief interval of peace, to be followed in a few years by the outbreak 
of wars on a larger scale than ever. 


CHAPTER III. 


RIVALRY BETWEEN FRANCE AND THE HAPSBURGS— 
FIRST PERIOD, 


§ 1. Contest between Charles V. and Francis J. for the Empire; success of 
Charles; grounds of quarrel between the two princes. § 2. Charles 
allies himself with Henry VIII. and Leo X.; outbreak of the war in 
1520; Italian campaign of 1521; death of Leo X.; accession of 
Adrian VI. and Clement VII. § 8. Defection of the Constable of 
Bourbon; campaign of 1524; failure of Charles’ invasion of France; 
Francis captured at Pavia. § 4. Reaction caused by Charles’ success; 
treaty of Madrid; Francis breaks the treaty and forms a league against 
Charles. § 5. Campaign of 1527; sack of Rome; Lautrec in Italy, 
1528; failure of French siege of Naples. § 6. Treaties of Cambray and 
Barcelona; second restoration of the Medici in Florence. § 7. Ferdi- 
nand of Austria acquires the crowns of Bohemia and Hungary. 


§ 1. Tue election of an emperor, in 1519, to succeed Maximilian I. 
involved important consequences not enly for Germany but for the 
whole of Europe. Maximilian, in his later years, had endeavoured 
to secure the crown for his grandson Charles. But the electors 
were by no means anxious to submit to a prince who was already 
ruler of Spain, the Netherlands, Naples, Sicily, and the New 
World, and who now succeeded his grandfather in the duchy of 
Austria. They were also unwilling to allow the imperial crown to 
become hereditary in the house of Hapsburg, which had already 
held ‘it for three generations. ‘These considerations encouraged 
Francis I. of France to come forward as a candidate for the empire. 
At first circumstances seemed to combine in his favour. He was 
still in the height of his military fame as the victor of Marignano, 
aud no prince seemed so capable of leading the forces of Europe 
against the Turks. He was in close relations with the Rhenish 
electors whose territories bordered on his own; and since the treaty 
of Bologna he*had been on the best terms with Pope Leo X. He 
spared no bribes and promises to purchase supporters, but before 
long his chances began to dwindle. Public opinion in Germany 
would be outraged by the election of a foreigner, and the electors, 
though irresponsible, could not wholly disregard this opinion. 
Charles was a*German, at least on the paternal side, and as duke of 
Austria he was a German prince. ‘lhe managers of his cause were 


46 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. mI. 


no less lavish in money and promises than the French king. The 
elector Frederick of Saxony, whose character gave him important 
influence, and who might have obtained the vacant dignity for 
himself had he wished, declared for Charles. One by one the 
electors began to desert Francis for his rival. The archbishop of 
Trier was the last to go over, and on the 28th of June, 1519, 
Charles V. was unanimously elected. Thus the highest dignity in 
Christendom was conferred upon a youth of nineteen, whose do- 
minions made him the most powerful prince that had ruled in 
Kurope since Charles the Great. The German princes were not 
blind to the risk of their independence in the choice of such a 
ruler, and they extorted conditions from him for their own security. 
The object of the capitulation which Charles had to sign was the 
establishment of those constitutional reforms which had been 
attempted under Maximilian. He promised to renew the authority 
of the Imperial Chamber, and by creating a Council of Regency to 
give the estates a share in the executive government. These 
reforms were insisted upon at the Diet of Worms in 152], after 
Charles’ arrival in Germany. 

It was obvious from the first that a war must break out between 
Charles V. and Francis I. Not only had the contest for the empire 
aroused a feeling of personal enmity between them, but at every 
point at which their territories touched there were causes of quarrel. 
In Italy, Charles held Naples as the successor of Ferdinand, but 
the claims of Charles VIII. to that kingdom had descended to 
Francis. The duchy of Milan had been conquered by Francis I., 
but Milan was an imperial fief and he had never received any 
investiture of it. ‘Then Charles was pre-eminently a Burgundian 
prince, the descendant of Charles the Bold and the heir to his 
rivalry with France. The duchy of Burgundy had been annexed 
by Louis XI., but the representative of the old dukes-was unlikely 
to acquiesce in its loss. In Flanders and Artois also there were 
. conflicting claims. On the side of the Pyrenees, Charles retained 
Navarre, from which Ferdinand had expelled John d’Albret. ‘The 
cause of the exiled family had been warmly espoused by the 
French Court. In addition to these isolated grounds of dispute, the 
rivalry had a wider aspect. Charles’ power was dangerous to 
the independence of the lesser states of Europe. Francis obtained 
no inconsiderable increase of strength by acting as the champion of 
national rights against a claimant to universal rule. He plays 
somewhat the same part iu the 16th century that England played 
in the Napoleonic wars, 

§ 2. War being recognised as inevitable, the two princes set them- 
selves to secure allies. They were especially anxious for the 


/ 


7 


A.D. 1519-1523. CHARLES V. AND FRANCIS IL 47 


support of Henry VIII. and Pope Leo X. Francis invited the 
English king to that famous interview which is known as the 
Field of the Cloth of Gold. But Charles had already visited 
England and gained over both Henry and his all powerful minister 
Wolsey. From the pomp and festivity of his interview with 
Francis, Henry VIII. proceeded to meet Charles at Gravelines, and 
there concluded a treaty with him. Francis relied complacently on 
the support of Leo X., but Charles could make offers which were 
irresistible to the pope. Leo was anxious to put an end to the 
spread of reforming doctrines in Germany; he was even more 
anxious to recover Parma and Piacenza, which had been annexed 
by his predecessor, but which he had been compelled to resign. 
Accordingly a treaty was concluded between pope and emperor, by 
which it was decided to expel the French from Milan, and to give 
that duchy to Francesco Sforza, the second son of Lodovico. 
Charles took the Medici family under his protection, and Parma 
and Piacenza were to be ceded to the pope. 

The war was commenced in Navarre, whither a French army 
was despatched to espouse the cause of Henry d’Albret in 1520. 
The campaign is notable only for the fact that at the siege of 
Pampeluna, Ignatius Loyola, then a young Spanish knight, received 
a severe wound. On his sick-bed his attention was drawn to 
religion, and he rose from it to become the founder of the Jesuits. 
The French easily overran Navarre, but were as easily driven out 
again. A campaign on the border of the Netherlands was: equally 
indecisive. In Italy alone was the war important. There the 
imperial troops, composed of Germans and Spaniards and assisted 
by the Swiss in the pay of the pope, drove the French from Milan. 
The French commander, Lautrec, who showed more vigour than 
ability, attempted to recover the province, but was defeated at 
Bicocca, and forced to retire from Lombardy. Thus the treaty 
between Charles and Leo was fulfilled. Parma and Piacenza were 
annexed to the papacy. Milan was given to Francesco Sforza, who 
swore fealty to the emperor. 

The news of the success of his troops reached Leo X. at Rome 
just before his death, which is said to have been: hastened by 
excessive joy. His successor was Adrian VI., who had been 
Charles’ tutor and had acted as regent in Spain during the revolt of 
the communes. Adrian was a man of self-denying integrity, and 
projected reforms in the Church which, if carried out, might have 
changed the history of Europe. But his schemes made him un- 
popular in Rome, and he died before he could accomplish anything 
(1523). Imperial influence again prevailed with the cardinals, and 
secured the election of Cardinal Giulio de Medici, the nephew of 


48 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. 11. 


Lorenzo the Magnificent, and hitherto the devoted adherent of 
Spain. He took the name of Clement VII. 

§ 5. Francis I. was deeply chagrined at the loss of Milan, and just 
when his affairs appeared’ most desperate he was threatened with 
new dangers by the treachery of the Constable of Bourbon. 
Louis XI. had married his daughter Anne to Peter of Beaujeu, heir 
to the duchy of Bourbon, on condition that, in default of male 
children, the duchy should pass to the crown. Thus the younger 
branch, of Montpensier, was to be disinherited. When duke Peter 
died, leaving an only daughter Susanna, the crown might have 
claimed the succession. But Louis XII, less anxious about the 
royal rights, married Susanna to Charies of Montpensier, who thus 
became duke of Bourbon, and was made by Francis I. Constable 
of France. But before long the power of the subject became an 
object of jealousy to the king; and the Constable also quarrelled 
with Francis’ mother, Louise of Savoy. The death of Susanna gave 
Louise a claim to Bourbon as the niece of Peter of Beaujeu. The 
crown could base still more sweeping claims on the treaty extorted 
by Louis XI. Charles of Bourbon, seeing himself in danger of 
being stripped of his territories, determined to save himself by 
treason. He made overtures to Charles V. and Henry VIIL, 
offering to co-operate with them in an invasion of France. Henry 
hoped to realise the designs of his predecessors on the French 
crown; while the ancient kingdom of Arles was to be revived for 
Bourbon. The news of the plot reached Francis I. as he was 
preparing to start with his army for Italy. He at once hurried 
back, and Bourbon, seeing his plans discovered, fled to join the 
imperial forces in Lombardy. Instead of the troops he had 
promised he brought to the emperor nothing but the services of a 
proscribed exile. 

Francis allowed his army to cross the Alps without him under 
an incapable favourite, Bonnivet. Had the latter marched straight 
upon Milan he must have seized the defenceless city. But his delay 
gave strength and courage to the garrison, and winter soon put an 
end to the campaign. Early in 1524 the imperialists defeated the 
French on the Sesia, where the Chevalier Bayard met his death, 
Bonnivet was compelled to withdraw to France. 

Emboldened by this success and by the representations of Bour- 
bon, Charles V. now determined to invade France and to crush his 
rival, An army under Bourbon and Pescara entered Provence, and 
laid seige to Marseilles. It was in vain that Bourbon urged a 
march towards his own territories, the emperor was anxious to 
acquire a port which would give him an easy entrance into France. 
Pestilence decimated the besieging forces, and the advance of 


A.D. 1523-1526. BATTLE OF PAVIA. 49 


Francis from Avignon forced them to a hasty and disorderly retreat. 
It was now Francis’ turn to be carried away by success. Regard- 
less of the advice of his mother and his wiser counsellors, he again 
crossed the Alps with a finearmy. No preparations had been made 
for resistance, and, marching at once to Milan, he made himself 
master of the city without opposition. Instead of pursuing and 
crushing the imperial army he sat down to besiege Pavia. The 
obstinate defence of the garrison under Antonio da Leyva gave 
Bourbon and Pescara time to collect recruits. In 1525 they left 
their camp at Lodi and advanced to the relief of Pavia. With 
rash self-confidence, Francis not only weakened his army by send- 
ing 10,000 men to Naples, but also determined to await the eneiny 
in his entrenchments. The battle which ensued was as fatal to the 
French as Poitiers or Agincourt. Ten thousand men fell on the 
field, and among the prisoners was the king himself. 

§ 4. This overwhelming success produced a sudden reaction among 
the emperor’s allics. In Italy there was a general fear lest the 
Spanish power should become supreme. ‘The Pope, Clement VIL, 
who owed his election to Charles, and whose only hope of restoring 
religious unity lay in the emperov’s alliance, allowed himself to be 
influenced by his interests as a Medici, and became a bitter enemy of 
Spain. Francesco Sforza felt that he was only a puppet in Milan, and 
was eager to free himself from imperial tutelage. Henry VIII., who 
had no motive beyond his own aggrandisement, urged Charles to a 
joint invasion of France, hoping to place the crown on his own 
head. But neither Charles nor Bourbon were anxious to gratify 
English ambition.. This disappointment opened Henry’s eyes to the 
dangers with which Charles’ success threatened Europe. Welsey 
was already alienated by the successive elections of Adrian VI. 
and Clement VII. to the papacy. Louise of Savoy, who acted as 
regent in France during her son’s captivity, was keen to take 
advantage of the change in political opinion. She concluded a 
truce with England and opened diplomatic relations with the 
pope. She even applied for assistance to the Turkish sultan 
Solyman. 

Meanwhile, regardless or ignorant of these symptoms of hostility, 
Charles thought only of extorting extreme concessions from his 
captive rival. In this his policy was short-sighted. France was 
not conquered, though it had lost its king. Terms which injured 
the vital interests of France were certain not to be carried out, and 
must give rise to further hostilities. Francis, however, eager to 
gain freedom, accepted the treaty of Madrid in January, 1526. By 
this he promised to restore the duchy of Burgundy, to give up his 
claims upon Naples, Milan, Flanders and Artois, and to furnish no 


50 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. In. 


more assistance to Henry d’Albret. ‘wo of his sons were to 
become hostages, and he himself was to marry Charles’ sister, the 
dowager Queen of Portugal. On these terms, Francis was allowed 
to return to France in March, 1526. 

Before signing the treaty, he had declared his acceptance to be 
compulsory and therefore not binding. ‘The cession of Burgundy 
was impossible, and he at once determined to renew the war. The 
hostility to the emperor which prevailed in Italy offered him great 
advantages. Venice, Milan and the pope became members of a new 
Holy League at Cognac (May, 1526), with the object of compelling 
Charles to release the French princes and to give Francesco Sforza 
independent possession of Milan. Henry VIII. was acknowledged 
as protector of the league. : 

§ 5. Charles, while loudly declaiming against the faithlessness of 
the French king, took measures for an energetic prosecution of the 
war. Bourbon’s army was far superior to that of the league, whick 
was commanded py the duke of Urbino. Francesco Sforza was 
speedily forced to surrender, and his duchy fell into the hands of 
the imperialists. Bourbon now received large reinforcements of 
Protestant troops from Germany under George Frundsberg. But 
the emperor sent neither instructions nor money to pay the troops. 
They became mutinous, and it was only possible to pacify them by 
the plunder of some rich city. In Bourbon’s circumstances the 
boldest policy seemed the safest, and he marched straight upon 
Rome. Frundsberg announced his intention to hang the pope. 
Clement VII.; trusting to the sanctity of his position, made no 
preparations for defence. Bourbon was killed at the first onslaught, 
but his soldiers avenged his death by the capture and sack of the 
imperial city. The new commander, Philibert Prince of Orange, 
was powerless to restrain their excesses, and Rome suffered more 
than it had done at the hands of Goths and Vandals centuries 
before. Clement VII., beseiged in the fortress of St. Angelo, was 

.compelled to surrender himself a prisoner. The Florentines were 
emboldened to throw off the despotism of the Medici and to restore 
the republic. 
' Charles’ second great success and the outrage on the papal dignity 
produced a still deeper impression than the victory of Pavia. 
Francesco Sforza and the Venetians renewed their league, which was 
joined by Florence. Francis I., who had hitherto done nothing for 
his Italian allies, despatched a large army under Lautrec into Italy. 
Lautree captured Genoa, where he restored the exiled Fregosi and 
Dorias, and might have conquered: Lombardy with ease. But the 
French were more anxious to humiliate the emperor than to restore 
Francesco Sforza. Regardless of the entreaties of his allies, Lautrec 


ee TS ef Te 


A.D. 1526-1529. TREATY OF CAMBRAY. dl 


marched southwards. The news of his approach necessitated the 
release of Clement VII., who fled to Orvieto. With great difficulty 
the Prince of Orange induced the imperial army to leave its comfort- 
able quarters in Rome, and threw himself into Naples just before 
the arrival of the French. Lautrec at once blockaded the city, 
while Andrea Doria, the first admiral of the age, cut off all con- 
nection by sea. Naples must have fallen but for the imprudent 
conduct of the French king, who determined to humble Genoa by 
making a great port of its old rival Savona. Doria’s patriotism was 
stronger than his attachment to France. He entered the service of 
Charles, expelled the French from Genoa, and restored the indepen- 
dence of his native city. ‘Thus Naples was saved. Pestilence 
attacked the besieging army and carried off Lautrec. The remnant 
of the French forces was forced to surrender at Aversa. Francis 
made another effort in 1529 to retrieve his falling fortunes in Italy. 
An army under St. Pol invaded Lombardy, but was completely 
defeated by Antonio da Leyva. 

§ 6. These French reverses produced a desire for peace, to which 
Charles, hampered by want of money, was not unwilling to accede. 
The negotiations were managed by Louise of Savoy and Margaret, 
the emperor’s aunt. By their exertions the treaty of Cambray was 
concluded on the basis of the former treaty of Madrid. Charles 
withdrew his claim to the immediate cession of Burgundy, but the 
other articles were confirmed. [francis was to renounce all 
pretensions to Milan, Naples, Genoa, Flanders and Artois, and to 
complete his marriage with Eleanor of Portugal. On these conditions 
his sons were to be set at liberty. 

Before the conclusion of this treaty, Charles had come to: terms 
with the pope at Barcelona. Not only did the emperor agree to the 
complete restoration of the States of the Church, but he also took 
the Medici family under his protection. Florence was to be restored 
to them, and Charles’ natural daughter, Margaret, was to marry 
Alessandro de Medici. Charles now lelt Spain to visit Italy in 
person. At Bologna he received the imperial crown from the pope, 
the last emperor who was so crowned. Francesco Sforza did 
homage and received again the duchy of Milan. Florence, after an 
obstinate defence, was reduced and compelled to submit to Alessan- 
dro de Medici. “After thus settling Italian affairs with the high 
hand, Charles V. proceeded to Germany. 

Thus the war, which had lasted with but slight intermission for 
nine years, ended in the humiliation of Francis I. The haughty 
victor of Marignano was driven altogether from Italy. The loss of 
Genoa cut off all direct connection between France and the peninsula, 
and Francis’ heartless desertion of his allies completely alienated 


52 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. 1. 


the Italians. But France itself had suffered less than its ruler. 
The strength and unity of the kingdom had been increased by the 
war, and had manifested itself in the easy repulse of hostile invasions. 
The interests of France lay in the maintenance or extension of its 
frontiers, not in the assertion of dynastic claims in Italy. The loss 
of Burgundy would have been a vital injury to France. But 
Burgundy was retained, and this in itself was more than compensa: 
tion for the loss of Milan. 

$7. 'The House of Hapsburg had advanced further during the 
war on its peculiar career. It had obtained that supremacy in Italy, 
which it retainel with small profit to itself or its subjects for three 
centuries. Napics and Milan were under its direct rule; Florence 
and the papacy were dependent allies. Venice alone remained 
independent, but Venice was no longer what it had been. And 
while establishing their power over Italy, the Hapsburgs had also 
extended their dominions in eastern Europe. In 1525, Lewis, the 
_Jagellon king of Hungary and Bohemia, had been killed in the 
battle of Mohacz with the Turks. His sister was married to 
Charles’ brother Ferdinand, to whom the emperor had handed over 
the Austrian territories. Partly on his marriage and partly on 
treaty rights Ferdinand based a claim to the vacant crowns. In 
Bohemia the dukes of Bavaria were encouraged by Clement VII. to 
become his rivals. But in that country Hussite traditions were still 
a power, and Ferdinand’s religious moderation secured him the 
crown against the harsh orthodoxy of a papal nominee. In Hungary 
a native noble, John Zapolya, came forward to claim the throne. 
Ferdinand defeated him, and received the crown at Stuhlweissen- 
burgh. But Zapolya’s cause was espoused by the Turkish sultan, 
who utilised the opportunity to seize great part of Hungary. The 
necessity of making head against Turkish aggression was not the 
least of the motives which induced Charles V. to conclude the 
treaty of Cambray. 


CHAPTER IV. 


THE REFORMATION. 


I,.GERMANY.—§ 1. Martin Luther; his early life; protest against in- 
dulgences; Melancthon; Ulrich von Hutten; burning of the papal 
bull. § 2. Policy of Charles V.; Diet of Worms; Luther in the 
Wartburg. § 3. Disturbances in Wittenberg; Luther’s reappearance ; 
action of the German princes. § 4. Knights’ war; reaction against 
the Reformation. § 5. Revolt of the peasants; Luther's attitude. 
§ 6. Charles V. quarrels with the Pope; Diet of Speier; progress of 
the Reformation. § 7. Protest of Speier; confession of Augsburg; 
League of Schmalkalde; Turkish war; treaty of Nuremberg. II. 
SWITZERLAND.—§ 8. Career of Zwingli. § 9. Quarrels among the 
Swiss Cantons; death of Zwingli; differences between his teaching and 
that of Luther. II. Scanprnavi1A.—§ 10. Weakness of the Calmar 
Union ;. deposition of Christian Hl. of Denmark. § 11. Reign of 
Frederick I.; Reformation in Denmark under Christian HI. § 12. 
Blood-bath of Stockholm; revolt of Sweden unuer Gustavus Vasa. 
§ 15. Political motives for Swedish Reformation ; Diet of Westeriis ; 
hereditary monarchy established. IV. JoHN CALVIN AND THE RE» 
FORMATION IN GENEVA.—S 14. Political condition of Geneva; teaching 
of Farel. § 15. Calvin arrives in Geneva; harshness of his system ; 
period of exile. § 16. Calvin returns to Geneva; peculiarities of his 
doctrine and institutions; persecution of his opponents; historical 
importance of Calvinism. 


J. GERMANY. 


§ 1. Tue revolt against medieval restraints upon freedom of thought 
had been commenced by the Italians in the so-called Renaissance ; 
it was completed by the Germans in the Reformation. The Italian 
humanists had been inevitably compelled to question many of the 
received dogmas, and to ridicule established superstitions. But 
they were content with negative criticism ; they had not sufficient 
earnestness to insist on any positive reform. That the renaissance 
spirit was compatible with acquiescence in existing abuses is obvious 
from the fact that Leo X., the representative patron of literature 
and art, was himself pope, that the refined sensualist, who devoted 
himself with equal zest to the pleasures of the intellect and of the 
table, was eager to suppress religious innovation with fire and 
sword. It was reserved for the more serious Germans to extend the 


54. a MODERN EUROPE. Guar. rv. 


humanist teaching to religion, and thus to further the emancipa- 
tion of Europe. 

Martin Luther, whose name stands for ever connected with the 
great movement of which he was the leader, was born at Hisleben 
on the 10th of November, 1483. His father was a poor miner, and 
his youth was one of hardship and suffering. His education began 
at the school of Mansfeld, and he always spoke with horror of the 
severity of his teachers. At the age of fifteen he was sent to 
another school at Kisenach, where he found a more comfortable 
home with relations of his mother. His father was by this time 
in easier circumstances, and he was able to support his son at the 
University of Erfurt, then the centre of the humanist teaching in 
Germany. But Luther’s religious nature preserved him from the 
indifference so often the result of this teaching; he refused to 
comply with his father’s desire that he should become a lawyer, 
and in 1505 he entered an Augustine monastery. ‘This was an 
all-important step in his life. All real vigorous reform must 
proceed from within. A humanist reformation, imposed by the 
culture of the outside world, could have had none of that deep 
moral feeling which characterised the influence of Luther. 

In his monastic retirement Luther devoted himself to study, 
especially of the Bible and the.works of Augustine. Here he first 
arrived at the unconscious perception of the wide differences 
between the old Christianity and the secular church which had 
grown up from it. In 1508 he was transferred to Wittenberg, to 
become a professor in the new university, which had been founded 
there in 1502 by [Frederick the Wise of Saxony. Luther’s vigorous 
personality and eloquence soon made him a power in Wittenberg 
and a favourite at the elector’s court. The duty of teaching com- 
pelled him to formulate his opinions, and to get rid of the 
mysticism which had hitherto blinded him. But he was not 
yet conscious of any opposition to the church of which he was a 
member. In 1512 he made a pilgrimage to Rome with feelings 
of the most profound reverence, though the contact with Italian 
corruption and immorality was not without influence. After his 
return he was employed in developing his doctrine of justification 
by faith, which was opposed not so much to the dogmas as to the 
practices of Roman Catholicism. 

Just at this time he was brought face to face with the most 
flagrant abuse in the church, the sale of indulgencess. The doctrine 
of indulgences was based on the theory that the merits of the 
whole church exceeded the sins of individual members, and that 
therefore there was a surplus stock of grace, which was at the 
disposal of the pope as head of the Church. In earlier times, such 


A.D. 1517. MARTIN LUTHER. 55 


indulgences had only been granted on condition of confession and 
the performance of penance. A possible penance was the payment 
of money, and as the Church became more and more secular, this 
had become the most satisfactory to the Roman Curia. The 
prevailing sentiment of the hierarchy was expressed by a chamber- 
lain of Innocent VIII., who said, “God desireth not the death of a 
sinner, but rather that he should pay and live.” Leo X., reduced 
to great straits by his building projects and by his war with the 
duke of Urbino, sent three commissions into Germany to raise 
money by the sale of indulgences. The most shameless of the 
itinerant vendors of pardon, Tetzel, appeared in Saxony, and 
Luther was convulsed with indignation. On 31st of October, 1517, 
he nailed ninety-five theses on the door of the parish church of 
Wittenberg. In these he maintained that repentance was a 
necessary condition of pardon, and that without it the pope’s 
indulgence was altogether impotent. 

It was accident that made Luther’s first quarrel with Rome turn 
on the question of indulgences; but it was a very fortunate 
accident, because it secured for him the support of the German 
princes. ‘Their interests were naturally opposed to the papal 
exactions, and they bitterly resented the transit of their subjects’ 
money across the Alps. At the time of the Council of Basel they 
had made vigorous efforts to put a stop to the abuse, but they had 
been foiled by the treachery of Frederick III. They were now 
cager to back up the intrepid monk whose convictions were so 
allied with their interests. At the diet of Augsburg (1518), 
attempts were made to induce the emperor to sanction the general 
opposition to the papacy. But Maximilian, anxious to conciliate 
the pope, that he might cease to oppose his grandson’s election, 
refused to listen to the princes, and thus lost an excellent oppor- 
tunity of putting the empire at the head of the great movement, 
and of restoring the unity of Germany. 

The Church was by no means without defenders; both in Italy 
and in Germeny theologians arose to confute Luther. The atten- 
tion of the pope was called to a controversy which affected so 
closely the revenues of the hierarchy. Attempts were made to 
bring Luther to reason by remonstrance. The Cardinal-legate 
Cajetan summoned him to Augsburg, but the haughty ecclesiastic 
failed to overawe the intrepid monk. Another attempt was made 


~ by Carl von Miltitz, a man of the world rather than a churchman. 


He succeeded in inducing Luther to promise silence, on condition 
that his opponents should also abstain from controversy till the 
matter was conclusively settled. From this promise Luther was 
freed by the indiscreet conduct of Eck, a member of the orthodox 


56 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. LY. 


university of Ingolstadt. He issued a treatise in which he attacked 
Luther’s positions, and the latter came forward to ansiver him in a 
public discussion at Leipzig (June 1519). No agreement could 
result from the discussion. Eck relied upon the authority of 
recent councils; Luther on the Bible and the early Fathers. The 
chief result of the controversy was Luther’s avowal that several 
of the Hussite doctrines which had been condemned at Constance 
were fundamentally Christian. By thus denying the infallibility 
of a general council, Luther took the first step in a complete 
rupture with the Church. 

Just before this Luther had been joined by an important ally, 
Melancthon, who became professor of Greek at Wittenberg. 
Melancthon was a relative and pupil of Reuchlin, and had 
already won reputation as a rising scholar. His zealous co- 
operation was of the utmost service to Luther. The settlement 
of the reformed doctrines was mainly the work of Melancthon, 
whose theology was more scholarly and accurate than that of his 
comrade. On the other hand, the practical tasks and the resistance 
to outside attack fell mostly to the more robust and independent 
Luther. 

Hitherto it had been doubtful what attitude would be assumed by 
the German humanists towards the Reformation. This was settled 
by the conduct of the poet and satirist Ulrich von Hutten. At first 
he had regarded the dispute with contempt as a monkish quarrel: 
but as he became conscious of the magnitude of the question, and 
appreciated Luther’s commanding attitude, he threw himself heart 
and soul inte the cause. He desired to free Germany altogether 
from its thraldom to the papacy. He gave up writing Latin and 
employed his native tongue, whose power he had first learned from 
the works of Luther. <A greater man than Hutten, Erasmus, was 
also at first inclined to favour the reformers. He advised the elec- 
tor of Saxony fot to withdraw his support from Luther, whose only 
fault was that “ he had hit the pope on the crown and the monks on 
the belly.” 

Meanwhile Kck, finding that his rival had not been silenced by 
the Leipzig discussion, determined to resort to other measures. 
Collecting Luther’s writings, he carried them to Rome, and there 
laid them before a commission appointed by the pope. There was 
no doubt of its decision, and Leo X. issued a bull excommunicating 
Luther and his adherents and ordering his books to be burnt. Eck 
himself was authorised to carry the bull to Germany, whither he 
returned in triumph. But his reception was not enthusiastic. The 
Germans were not inclined to respect a decision which had been 
come to in Italy, at the instigation of a rival, and without hearing 


A.D. 1521. THE DIET OF WORMS. 57 


the accused. Luther was prepared with his answer. He issued an 
appeal ‘‘ to the nobility of the German nation,” and he attacked the 
papal authority in “The Babylonish Captivity of the Church.” 
Then on the 10th December 1520 he went in procession to the 
market-place at Wittenberg, and there publicly burnt the pope’s 
bull. The elector of Saxony, following the advice of Erasmus, had 
already resolved that the bull should not be executed in his 
territories. 

§ 2. Thus, then, the schism had been completed, and, with a courage 
which captivated the people, Luther had broken down the bridge 
behind him. He was at war with the Church, and ecclesiastical 
weapons had failed against him. . It was therefore necessary to appeal 
to the secular arm. At this conjuncture the newly elected emperor 
Charles V. made his first appearance in Germany. Everything 
seemed to depend upon the will of a youth not yet of age. The 
religious policy of Charles V. has been a matter of dispute: but the 
fact is that he had no religious policy at all. His religion was that 
of his ancestors, and he never gave sufficient thought to it to desire 
either to change or to defend it. His policy was dictated solely by 
political interests, and varied with those interests. The cause of his 
failure lay in the fact that, having no real religious convictions 
himself, he had no conception of the influence of such convictions on 
others. 

The diet of Worms met on 28th of January, 1521. After settling 
political questions, its attention was directed to religious differences. 
Luther appeared before the diet to defend his views. Hutten wrote 
to the emperor urging him to make no concessions to Rome. But 
Charles V. was moved neither by the heroic firmness of the monk 
nor by the eloquence of the poet. He wished to secure the alliance 
of Leo X. against Francis I. This could only be done by yielding 
to the pope’s desire to put down reform. Accordingly the edict of 
Worms was issued, which declared Luther a heretic and placed him 
under the imperial ban. 

The imperial edict was not a whit more efficacious than the 
papal bull.. Luther himself had left Worms before its issue, and on 
his return journey he had been seized by the emissaries of the 
friendly elector of Saxony and had been concealed in the castle of 
the Wartburg. There he employed himself in study and in the 
famous translation of the Bible, which not only created German 
prose, but also made religion the property of the people, instead of 
being, as before, the monopoly of the priests. His disappearance, 
which was at first kept a profound secret, produced a marvellous 
impression in Germany. It was feared that he had fallen a victim 
to the enmity of the church, and indignation at his supposed 


58 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. IV 


martyrdom increased the number of sympathisers and adherents. 
As the news leaked out that he was alive and in safety, there was a 
general feeling of joyful relief. Partly through popular literature, 
partly through the devoted energy of preachers, the Lutheran doc- 
trines were spread throughout the length and breadth of Germany. 
‘The most orthodox princes were unable to suppress the obnoxious 
but contagious heresy. 

§ 5. In Wittenberg, which was now more than ever the centre of 
reform, and which offered a safe refuge to religious exiles, the 
absence of Luther gave rise to grave dangers. His place was taken 
by Carlstadt, a zealous reformer but a man of little strength of 
character. He aliowed himself to be carried away by the desire 
for extreme and unnecessary changes. Among the numerous exiles 
who came to Wittenberg were the so-called “prophets” of 
Zwickau, Claus Storch and his followers, who urged the people to 
the wildest excesses. Carlstadt fell completely under their influence. 
Riots ensued, in which the images in the churches were destroyed. 
There was danger that the elector Frederic would feel himself 
compelled to oppose a movement which produced such anarchy. 

The news of these events drew Luther from his retirement. At 
the risk. of his life he returned to Wittenberg. In a series of 
six sermons he preached the necessity of moderation, and con- 
demned the conduct of the popular leaders. His influence pre- 
vailed. The “ prophets” departed from Wittenberg, and order was 
restored. 

Charles V. had left Germany after the diet of Worms. During 
his absence the government was in the hands ofa Council of Regency, 
which had been created by the diet. Jor the first time Germany 
was subject to a national and representative government. The 
princes who formed a majority in the council were by no means 
influenced by the same motives as the emperor. In spite of the 
entreaties of the orthodox duke George of Saxony, they allowed the 
_edict of Worms to fall into oblivion. Their.motive in this was not 
an-inclination to Lutheranism. Most of them feared that in the 
excited condition of the people severe measures might produce an 
outbreak, And they were actuated by that jealousy of papal 
interference which had been more or less powerful among the 
German princes since the time of Lewis the Bavarian (1814-1347). 
The Imperial Chamber, which had been re-constituted in 1521, took 
no steps to enforce the edict, and disregarded the urgent appeals of 
pope Adrian VI. The diet of Nuremberg (1523) presented to the 
pope a hundred gravamina complaining of the abuses of the 
ecclesiastical system. Thus, while the emperor, for political 
reasons, condemned Luther, the German nation adopted his cause 


J 


A.D. 1522-1523. THE KNIGHTS’ WAR. 59 


as their own. Before long Luther was able to leave the Wartburg 
and to again appear in public with perfect safety. 

§ 4. But, in spite of these encouragements, his position was one 
of great difficulty. He had been able to resist the tendency to 
religious extravagance, but he was unable to check the political 
aspirations, which were in some respects the result of bis teaching. 
Luther himself was a steadfast opponent of anything like armed 
resistance to authority ; but his views on this point were by no 
means shared by all his followers. There were two great move- 
ments at this time, which directly grew out of the spirit of the 
Reformation, the knights’ war, and the peasant revolt. With both 
of them Luther could not but partly sympathise, yet he was 
compelled to disapprove of them because they relied for success 
upon. force. 

The knights, or lesser German nobility, occupied an anomalous 
position. While they .claimed to be independent of any power 
except the emperor, they were excluded from all share in the diets. 
They had thus no common political interests with any other order, 
and constantly fought for their own hand. They were especially 
opposed to the increasing power of the princes, whom they regarded 
astheir natural enemies. The sp kesman of the knightly order at this 
time was Ulrich von Hutten. Hehad been bitterly disappointed by 
Charles V.’s conduct at Worms; and he now conceived the idea of 
placing the knights at the head of the national opposition to foreign 
and papal interference. With the strength thus obtained they 
would be able to overthrow the supremacy of the princes. He gained 
over to his views Franz von Sickingen, the owner of numerous 
castles on the Rhine and the commander of an independent army of 
personal followers. Had they made their movement immediately 
after the diet of Worms, it. might have been successful. But 
Sickingen was then negotiating with the emperor about assuming 
the command of an army against Francis I., and the opportune 
moment was allowed to pass. But in 1522 the war was commenced 
with an attack on the elector of Trier. It was expected that he 
would be easily subdued, But Luther’s resolute opposition to war- 
like measures withheld general support from the knights, and the 
keen-sighted princes armed at once in defence of the interests of 
their order. Sickingen was repulsed from Trier and besieged in his 
strong eastle of Landstuhl. Its mediaeval defences were battered 
down by artillery, and Sickingen died as his enemies entered the 
fortress (1523). Hutten escaped and fled to Switzerland, where he 
died soon afterwards, The princes, aided by the modern system 
of warfare, gained a great victory, and the knights, “an army of 
officers without soldiers,” were deprived of all political importance. 


60 MODERN EUROPE. Cur. Iv. 


The knights’ war and its failure produced a reaction which was 
unfavourable to the progress of the Reformation. In spite of the 
moderation displayed by Luther, the disorder was attributed to 
his teaching. Hitherto Germany had been united in the demand 
for reform in the Church, but a party was now formed which was 
opposed to all reform. This was aided by the policy of the new — 
pope, Clement VII., who sent cardinal. Campeggio to Germany to 
take advantage of the growing dislike of revolutionary progress. 
The legate failed in his demand for the enforcement of the edict of 
Worms, but he succeeded in coming to terms with the dukes of 
Bavaria, the archduke of Austria, and most of the south German 
princes. At a convention at Ratisbon (1524) a few superficial 
reforms were made and the power of the princes in Church matters 
was extended. On these terms it was agreed to take measures for 
the suppression of the Lutheran heresy. Thus the pope suceeded 
in dividing Germany into two hostile camps. In Austria, Bavaria 
and other provinces the reformers were persecuted and driven into 
exile. At the same time the power of the Council of Regency and 
of the Imperial Chamber, which depended upon German unity, was 
lessened, and the constitution of these assemblies altered. 

§ 5. Thus the central authority was weakened just at a time when 
it was most wanted to preserve order. For the Catholic reaction 
gave new strength to the radical party, and brought Luther's 
moderate policy into discredit. Carlstadt became again the preacher 
of extreme measures. Expelled through Luther’s influence from 
Saxony, he wandered through southern Germany teaching revolu- 
tionary doctrines to the lower classes. He had an able assistant in 
this work in Thomas Miinzer, the most violent of the anabaptist 
prophets of Zwickau. ‘These men found a welcome reception among 
the down-trodden class of peasantry. Of all classes in Germany 
the most depressed and enslaved was the Bauer or peasant. Unlike 
the Knglish villein, he had as yet made no step towards the 
‘acquisition of personal liberty. He was the chattel cf his master, 
and he had no legal or constitutional remedy against oppression. 
Armed rebellion was his only resource. Already isolated move- 
ments had taken place in Kempten (1492), in Elsass (1490), and in 
the neighbourhood of the Black Forest (1513). These had all 
been put down with the strong hand, and the condition of the 
peasant was made even harder than before. But towards the end of 
1524 a general rising of peasants commenced, on a far larger and more 
important scale than before. The Bundschuhe, the peasants’ standard, 
was first raised in Swabia, and their demands were formulated 
in twelve articles. These are worth recording for their moderation, 
and because they give the best clue to the grievances complained of. 


ei 


A.D. 1525. THE PEASANT REVOLT. 61 


The influence of the Reformation is to be seen in the fact that, each 
article is supported by reference to the scriptures. 

1. The congregation are to elect their minister. 

2. The great tithe (of corn) is to be paid, but the small tithes (of 
animals) are to be abolished. 

. The peasants are to be free, and no longer bondsmen. 

. Game, fowls, and fish are to be free as God created them. 

. Fuel from the woods to be free to all. 

. Compulsory service to be no longer unlimited. 

. All service beyond the contract to be paid for in wages. 

. Rents to be regulated afresh in proportion to the value of the 
land. 

9. Arbitrary punishments to be put an end to. 

10. Common pastures and fields to be restored. 

11. Heriots to be abolished. 

12. These propositions to be tested by Scripture, and if found 
contrary to that they are not to stand. 

These articles, moderate as they were, were promptly rejected by 
the ruling classes, and the revolt spread. The north of Germany 
was alone exempt from the general anarchy and bloodshed. The 
peasants’ demands were not everywhere so reasonable as in Swabia. 
In Thuringia especially, where Miinzer was supreme, the wildest 
ideas prevailed. There was no concerted action among the peasants, 
and they were no match for the united forces of the princes. If 
the knights had been an army of officers without soldiers, the 
peasants were an army of soldiers without officers. Everywhere 
the revolt was put down with merciless severity. By the end of 
1525 the peasants’ war was at an end. 

This result was due in great measure to Luther’s influence. 
Himself a peasant’s son, he might have been expected to sympathise 
with the sufferings of the class from which he had sprung; and at 
the beginning of the revolt he wrote a guarded letter in which he 
_ expressed such sympathy, though he advised the most cautious 
measures. This encouraged the peasants to hope that, if not with 
them, he would at any rate not be against them. But after the war 
had commenced Luther wrote another and very violent letter, in 
which he urged the princes to cut down the misguided men who 
had ventured to take the redress of their grievances into their own 
hands. Thus he definitely threw in his lot with the ruling classes, 
a fact which influenced the whole course of the German Reforma- 
tion. At this critical conjuncture, Frederick the Wise of Saxony, 
the enlightened patron and supporter of Luther, died (1525). He 
was succeeded in the electorate by his brother John, who was a still 
more zealous partizan of the reformers. | 


4 


COI cd Ol FP CO 


62 MODERN EUROPE. _-* Gap. rv. 


§ 6. The revolt of the peasants naturally strengthened the 
hands of the conservative German princes. George of Saxony en- 
deavoured to form a league of north German princes on the basis 
of the convention of Ratisbon of 1528. It was at this time that 
Charles VY. concluded the treaty of Madrid, in which it was 
arranged that he and Francis should co-operate in the suppression 
of heresy. Had Charles now appeared in Germany and definitely 
assumed the championship of the Catholic faith, the progress of 
reform might have been stayed. But the treaty of Madrid was 
never carried out, and at Cognac the pope joined I'rancis against 
the emperor. This quarrel between Charles and Clement VII. was 
of the highest importance for Germany. At the Diet of Speier in 
June, 1526, it was taken for granted that the emperor’s opinions 
had changed; and a recess was issued which enacted that as regards 
the edict of Worms and religious disputes, “‘ each state so live rule 
and conduct itself as it shall be ready to answer to God and his 
Imperial Majesty.” 

This recess may be regarded as completing the first stage of the 
Reformation. ‘The Lutherans had failed in securing the united 
support of Germany; but there was henceforward no prospect. of 
bringing them back to the old faith. Germany stood divided into 
two hostile camps; and the religion of each state was to be settled 
by the will of its ruler, a principle which was afterwards formulated 
in the words, cujus regio ejus religio. It has often been said that 
the Reformation completed the disunion of Germany, but this is 
hardly true without limitations. ‘The disunion existed long before, 
The Reformation did at first, in 1521, offer a prospect of restoring 
unity. This might have been accomplished had the emperor been 
alive to the interests of Germany. But Charles V. was a Burgundian 
or a Spaniard rather than a German. He allowed the opportunity 
to pass, and German divisions were not only renewed but intensified 
by religious differences. 

Though; after the diet of Speier, reform was confined veteran 


- 


limits, yet within those limits it continued to progress. Luther broke 


completely with the old church by throwing off his monastic vows 
and mairying a nun, Catharine Boria (1526). he reformed states 
set to work to form Faaleoe Bile churches on the basis of the new 
doctrines. Services were conducted in German. Monasteries were 
suppressed and. their revenues devoted to religion or education, 
though in some cases they were diverted to secular uses. Luther’s 
Bible and hymns were everywhere adopted.. The lead in these 
changes was taken by Saxony under the elector John, and by Hesse 
under the young and enthusiastic landgrave Philip. Other states 
were not slow to follow their example. _'The imperial cities, headed 


A.D. 1526-1530. THE LEAGUE OF SCHMALKALDE. 63 


by Augsburg, Ulm, &c., eagerly adopted the new doctrines, In 
Brandenburg, margrave George became a convert. His brother 
Albert was grand-master of the Teutonic order; but in 1525 he 
transformed Prussia into a secular duchy and acknowledged the 
suzerainty of the king of Poland. The Reformation was also 
introduced into Brunswick, Liineburg, Anhalt, Silesia, East Fries- 
land, and Schleswig-Holstein. 

§ 7. But the position of the reformed states was as yet far from 
secure. ‘I'he orthodox princes, especially duke George of Saxony and 
the dukes of Bavaria, were eager to repress the progress of reform, | 
and the emperor had yet to declare his will on the matter. As long 
as he was engaged in war with the pope there was no fear of his 
interference. But in 1529 he came to terms with Clement VIL, 
and at this juncture another dict met at Speier (21 February). 
The imperial commissioners made no secret of their master’s 
designs. ‘Their proposal was to disregard the edict of 1526 and to 
return to the edict of Worms which had never been executed. The 
influence of the emperor, who had just been so successful in his 
Italian war, was sufficient to induce a majority to support this. 
But the minority issued a protest, signed by John of Saxony, 
George of Brandenburg, Ernest of Ltineburg, Philip of Hesse, 
Wolfgang of Anhalt, and the representatives of fourteen cities. 
From this time the reforming party received the name of Pro- 
testants. 

Charles V. now appeared in person in Germany, prepared to 
enforce obedience to his views, and to carry out his agreement with 
the pope. A diet met at Augsburg, and the emperor entered the 
city with mediwval pomp. His remonstrances with the protesting 
princes produced no effect, as they refused to sacrifice their con- 
victions. The protestant creed was drawn up by Melancthon in 
the Confession of Augsburg. All efforts to bring about a recon- 
ciliation between the rival beliefs failed. Ultimately an edict was 
drawn. up which forbade the teaching of protestant doctrines, and 
commanded all men to submit to the established church. Charles 
promised to induce the pope to summon a general council which 
should decide religious differences. 

The Protestants could not accept this decree, and they felt 
certain that it would be enforced by arms. In the winter of 1530 
they met together at Schmalkalde and there concluded a league for 
mutual defence. Germany seemed on the verge of civil war, but it 
was averted for a time by an invasion of the Turks, who besieged 
Vienna. Charles could not afford to forfeit the support of the 
Protestant princes,.and this they were willing and anxious to give. 
The repulse of the Turks restored matters to their former condition, 


_ 64 ; MODERN EUROPE, CHAP. IV. 


but Charles was again inclined to peace by the desire to secure the 
election of his brother Ferdinand as king of the Romans. And in 
1532 the Turkish sultan renewed his invasion. This led to the 
conclusion of a peace at Nuremberg, which stipulated that until the 
meeting of a general council no one should be molested on account 
of his religion, and that all processes against Protestants begun in 
the Imperial Chamber should be stopped. In return for these 
concessions the Protestants furnished a large contingent to the 
imperial army. Charles himself assumed the command, his first 
experience as a military leader. The Turks refused to risk a battle 
and after a brief campaign retired. 

Thus the two parties in Germany remained unreconciled darth 
both unsubdued. The Protestants had obtained some security for 
their belief, but this was avowedly only temporary. From this 
time their history depends mainly on the European complications 
in which Charles. V. was again involved. The elector John of 
Saxony died in 1532, and was succeeded by his son, John Frederick, 
who rivalled his father in his devotion to the cause of reform. 


II. SwiITZERLAND. 


§ 8. The Swiss confederation had become practically free from all 
subjection to the empire in the time of Maximilian. The supreme 
authority was in the hands of the federal council, while each canton 
enjoyed a large amount of democratic freedom. This constitution 
made the Swiss as a body more enlightened than the population of 
any other: European state. The humanist teaching found ready 
acceptance among them, and through it they were prepared to 
welcome proposals of reform. 

What Luther was in Germany, Ulrich Zwingli was in Switzer- 
land. He was born on the Ist of January, 1484, the son of the 
chief magistrate of the village of Wildhaus. He was educated at 
Berne hers the new classical learning was taught, and in 1499 he 
proceeded to the University of Vienna. After taking his degree he 
entered the church, and became curate of Glarus. From the first 
he established his reputation as an enlightened student and teacher 
of theology. Like Luther he made a careful study of the epistlés 
of St. Paul, and learnt from them many of the same doctrines as 
the German reformer. As army chaplain, he accompanied the 
Swiss troops in the Italian campaign of 1515, and there first learnt 
his abhorrence of the system which allowed his countrymen to be 
hired out to fight the battles of European princes. In 1519 he 
became curate of Zurich, where he entered upon his reforming career. 
The sale of indulgences roused his wrath, and he induced the canton 


; 


? 


A.D. 1484-1531. ULRICH ZWINGLI. 65 


of Zurich to refuse admission to the papal emissary, Bernhardin 
Samson. But his first real collision with the papacy arose in 1521, 
when Leo X. sent to Switzerland to raise forces for the war against 
the French. He was unable to prevent the levy of troops, but his 
patriotic feelings led him to make: bitter complaints against the 
Roman pontiff. From this time his teaching became bolder. He 
attacked the church rules of fasting and the celibacy of the clergy, 
He urged the people to base their belief on the Scriptures alone and 
not on human institutions, His doctrines led to a quarrel. with the 
bishop of Constance, in whose diocese Zurich lay.. The canton 
supported Zwingli, and in 1525 definitely threw off the authority 
of the bishop. As there was no temporal prince, the settlement 
of ecclesiastical affairs devolved: naturally upon the congregation. 
From Zurich the reform spread to Berne, Basel and other cantons. 
§ 9. As political motives had from the first influenced Zwingli, so 
his reforms continued to have a political tendency: He wished to 
reorganise the federal constitution. At present the four forest 
cantons, Uri, Schwyz, Unterwalden, and Lucerne, had as many 
votes in the federal ‘diet as the other, cantons, though the latter 
were larger and more numerous. Zwingli wished to put an 
end to this anomalous state of things and to establish equality of 
votes. But this produced a natural opposition among the cantons 
whose interests were threatened. They adhered obstinately to the 
orthodox religion, as the best security for their political power. 
The differences could only be settled by arms, and Zwingli had 
none of Luther’s objections to their employment. In 1529 the war 
broke out and the four cantons were defeated. By the. peace of 
Cappel they were compelled to pay the expenses of the war, and a 
rule was made that in each canton the religion should be that of 
the majority of the congregations. This treaty could not be lasting 
on account of the determination of the forest cantons to maintain- 
their political predominance. ~ A dispute between Zurich and 
‘Berne, both of whom claimed the dignity of metropolis, encouraged 
their opponents to renew the war. In October, 1531, the citizens 


\ of Zurich were completely defeated at Cappel, and Zwingli himself 


was slain. The second peace of Cappel (November, 1531) so far 
“confirmed the previous treaty that it allowed each canton to settle its 
own religious affairs without external interference. Thus in Switzer- 
‘and,’ as in Germany, the Reformation produced religious disunion. 
The doctrines of Zwingli were not identical with those of Luther. 
They differed mainly on the subject of the communion. Luther 
adopted a mystical explanation of the real presence which was not 
easily intelligible, and which was an evident compromise. Zwingli, 
more logical and consistent, declared against transubstantiation 
5 


66 MODERN EUROPE. CHapP. Iv. 


altogether, and considered the words on which it was based to be 
merely symbolic. This gave rise to a quarrel between the two 
reformers, and Luther, ever prone to sacrifice courtesy to conviction, 
spoke of his Swiss fellow-worker in terms which did little credit to 
his heart or his understanding, There was also another important 
difference between the German and Swiss Reformations which arose 
out of the differing political constitution of the two countries. 
Lutheranism strengthened the hands of the territorial princes: 
Awingli established the supremacy of the congregation, 


IIT. ScaAnvInaviaA. 


§10. In 1397 the three Scandinavian kingdoms, Denmark, Sweden 
and Norway, had been united at the union of Calmar by Margaret, 
daughter of the Danish king Waldemar III. Such a union seemed 
natural and inevitable, but it was unsuccessful, because it was based 
merely upon dynastic interests and paid no regard to the feelings of 
the people. Though ruled by one sovereign, the three kingdoms 
remained isolated from each other; and the king of Denmark was 
practically powerless in Sweden and Norway. Besides this, within 
each kingdom the royal power was weakened by the independence 
of the church and the nobles. .,'they possessed private jurisdiction, 
the right of taxation and coinage, and escheated property fell not 
to the crown, buf to the community of nobles. The Scandinavian 
Reformation was essentially a political movement. It had its origin 
in these political conditions, and it prepared the way for the simul- 
taneous development of the central power and of national unity. 

In 1513 Christian II: of the house of Oldenburg obtained the 
three crowns. He was a man of considerable ability, but was 
endowed with a headstrong temper and little foresight. Under the 
influence of his mistress, or rather of her mother, a native of demo- 
cratic Friesland, he set himself to break the overwhelming power 
of the nobles, and to make himself supreme. In Sweden he over- 


‘threw the aristocratic government of the Stures (1520), but his | 


tyrannical and brutal conduct gave risé to a revolt which was / 
attended with important consequences. In Denmark he set him-/ 
self to raise the middle and lower classes as a counterpoise to the 
uobles. He encouraged commerce and manufactures, and endea- 
voured to break off the oppressive mercantile monopoly of the 
Hanse towns. At the same time he tried to ally himself with. 


German. Protestantism, and induced his) uncle, the elector of > 


Saxony, to send a Lutheran preacher to Denmark. But_ his 


arbitrary conduct produced a general indignation which blinded ~~ 


\ 
\ 


men’s eyes to measures tending to real advancement. The death / : 
| ~ 


} 


A.D. 1520-1533. REFORMATION IN DENMARK. 67 


of his mistress, which he attributed to poison, aroused all the worst 
passions of his nature. The nobles and clergy, who saw their 
independence threatened, took advantage of the king’s unpopularity 
to excite a revolt. They obtained support from Liibeck, the head 
of the Hanseatic league. Christian I]. was driven from Denmark 
in 1523, and the crown was conferred on his uncle, Frederick, duke 
of Schleswig-Holstein. ; 

_7 § 11. Frederick I. was a Protestant, and had already introduced the 
reformed religion into his own duchies. But he was-compelled to 
accept a capitulation in which he swore to do nothing to the pre- 
judice of Roman Catholicism. While keeping the letter of his oath, 
he did nothing to oppose the progress of the Reformation, which 
made rapid strides. \In 1527 a diet at Odensee gave formal tolera- 
tion to Lutheranism, at least until the meeting of a general council. 
But the progress of the new doctrines aroused the jealousy of the 
powerful clergy, and Christian IT., who had returned to the orthodox 
faith, was encouraged in 1531 to attempt the recovery of the crown. 
But the undertaking failed, Christian’was compelled to surrender, 
and remained a prisoner till his death in 1559, 

On the death of Frederick I., in 1533, the two religious parties in 
Denmark measured their strength. The Catholics supported his 
second son John, while the Protestants rallied round the elder 
brother Christian. Ultimately, mainly by the assistance of Sweden, 
Christian IIT, obtained the crown. In his reign the Reformation 
was completely carried out. The nobles assisted the king to over- 
throw and despoil the church. The fall of one of the great 
independent powers in the state led to the foundation of a strong 
national monarchy in Denmark. 

§ 12. Meanwhile in Sweden a great. revolution had taken place. 
Christian II. had hoped to crush for ever Swedish independence. 
After the defeat of the aristocratic government, he bad massacred all 
the nobles at Stockholmin cold blood, ‘Thus he thought to deprive 
the people of their natural leaders: he even dreamt that the lower 
classes would be conciliated by the fall of their oppressors. In this 
he was completely mistaken. .The news of the bloody massacre 
produced for the first time a real national spirit in Sweden. Hatred 
of the Danes and a desire to free themselves from the unnatural 
union overpowered all other considerations. ‘The representative of 
this new spirit was Gustavus Erichsen, who received from his coat 
of arms the surname of Vasa; Himself of noble descent; he had been 
carried by Christian II. into Denmark as a hostage in 1518. From 
this imprisonment he escaped in 1520, only to hear the news of the 

* massacre, in which his father and all his other relatives had fallen. 
From this time he consecrated his life to. the work of vengeance. 


( 


\ 


68 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. IV. 


A price was placed upon his head, and it was with great difficulty 
that he escaped from his enemies to find a refuge among the loyal 
peasants of Dalecarlia in the north of Sweden. There he lived for 
nearly a year, sharing the occupations of the rough people among 
whom he dwelt and gradually maturing his schemes, In 1521 he 
collected round him some hundreds of faithful peasants, and with 
this small force he commenced his great work—the emancipation 
of Sweden. National wrongs and aspirations brought to his standard 
crowds of inexperienced but determined soldiers as he marched 
southwards. He took Westeris and Upsala, and advanced upon 
Stockholm. But the capital, garrisoned by Danish troops, resisted 
all his efforts, when suddenly in 1523 came the news of Christian 
IL’s expulsion from Denmark. The Stockholm garrison withdrew, 
Gustavus Vasa was crowned king of. Sweden we) une ae and 
entered his capital in state. 

§ 13. But he was as yet only on the threshold of his difticulties. 
He had obtained a crown, but no real power with it. ‘The nobles 
regarded him with jealousy as an equal who had been raised above 
them by the favour of the populace. The country was unaccustomed 
to the restraints of orderly government. During the long anarchy 
the church and the nobles had acquired all the power and nearly 
all the wealth of the country. Moreover Gustavus’ relations with 
Denmark were doubtful. The support of Liibeck was necessary 
for him, but Liibeck was also the ally of Frederick I. If the latter 
insisted on the renewal of the Union of Calmar, how would Sweden 
be able to resist him? his difficulty was removed by the modera- 
tion of Frederick I., who allowed Liibeck to negotiate the treaty 
of Malmoe (1524). By this Sweden was declared independent, 
with the exception of the southern provinces, which remained 
united to Denmark. Thus the Union of Calmar came to an end. 

Gustavus Vasa was now left free to complete his work of estab- 
lishing a strong monarchy in Sweden, His: first necessity was a 
sufficient revenue, because, besides the expenses of government, he 
was heavily in debt to Liibeck. He could not afford to quarrel with 
the nobles, who were already sufficiently’ hostile to him. He could 
wring no more from the peasants, who had given their all in his 
cause. In these straits he adopted a very simple policy. He de- 
termined to introduce the Reformation into Sweden, not from 
religious but from political motives. This would enable him to 
overthrow the church, and to obtain for the crown a large part of 
the clerical revenues. Out of these he would be able to improve the 
position of the lower classes, and if necessary to conciliate the nobles. 
But there were still great difficulties in the way. The nobles were 
sure to see in any attack on the church a scheme against themselves, 


Av. 1520-1527, GUSTAVUS. VASA. 69. 


as their property was held by no better title. And the uncultured 
peasants, loyal as they had proved themselves, were still devoted to 
their ancient religion. It was necessary to proceed with great 
caution. Lutheran preachers were allowed full liberty of teaching, 
though Gustavus was careful not to avow himself as their partisan. 

But his designs were seen through, and a revolt broke out in 1526, 

which was sia tinenweds 

In 1527 Gustavus Vasa summoned a diet at Westeriis, at which 
not only nobles and clergy, but also representatives of the townsmen 
and peasants w "ere present. Before this assembly the king laid his 
plans. They met with determined opposition. Prepared. for this, 
Gustavus with theatrical promptness announced his determination 
_to resign the crown. ‘The diet, astounded by this sudden move, and 

conscious of the anarchy which must result from such a step, yielded 
to hisdemafds. Four articles were issued, which are the foundation- 
stone of the new Swedish monarchy :— 

1. All estates are jointly bound to oppose all rebellion and to 
defend the government from external and internal enemies. 

2. The king is allowed the free disposal of clerical and monastic 
property. 

3. The nobles have the right to take possession of all their property 
which has passed into the hands of the church since 1454.. 

4, Preachers shall have freedom to announce the pure word of 
God, and the Gospel shall be read in all Christian schools, 

Thus the Reformation was accomplished in Sweden, and was based 
in the first place on political necessity. It was not, as in Germany 
and in Switzerland, first taught to the people and afterwards adopted 
by the government. On the contrary, it was introduced by the 
crown to further its own interests. Henceforward the clergy with- 
drew from the Swedish diets, ‘The king had been compelled to 
purchase the support of the nobles by dangerous concessions, and 
thus to increase a power which he wished to lessen. In spite of this, 
Gustavus gave a national existence to Sweden, and established on a 
firm basis the royal power, which (1544) was made hereditary for his 
descendants. 


IV. Joun Catvin anp THE REFORMATION IN GENEVA. 


§ 14. Geneva, situated on the border between the German and 
Romance nations, was subject in the sixteenth century to a triple 
authority. The sovereienty rested with the bishop: but the duke of 
Savoy had certain rights over the city, and the burghers claimed to 
exercise municipal self-government. Charles III. of Savoy (1504~ 
1553) 1 wished to annex Geneva to his duchy, and for this purpose he 


70 MODERN EUROPE: Oar. Iv. 


gained over the bishop. The independent burghers formed an 
opposition party which leaned for support on the neighbouring 
Swiss Confederation. Hence they received the name of “ Hid- 
genossen” or * Huguenots,” while the supporters of the duke were 
nicknamed “‘ Mamelukes.” ‘The conflict lasted ten years, and ended 
in the victory of the liberal party, who received powerful support from 
Berne. The influence of Berne, which had adopted the doctrines 
of Zwingli, and the natural impulse of opposition to episcopal 
authority, encouraged the development of religious reform ip 
Geneva. The new doctrines found an active and energetic teacher 
in Guillaume Farel, a native of Gap in Dauphiné. In 1435 the 
mass was abolished by order of the municipal council, and those who 
refused to accept the change went intoexile. ‘These events gave new 
ardour to the enemies of the city. The bishop laid Geneva under an 
interdict, and Charles III., supported by the Catholic exiles, made a 
last effort to restore his authority. But Geneva, again assisted by 
Berne, successfully defended itself, and the conquest of Savoy by the 
French relieved them from further danger on the side of the duke. 

Thus in 1536 Geneva became an independent municipality, and 
had adopted Protestantism on account of its connection with the 
cause of liberty. But the work of reform was by no means 
completed. Constant party conflicts had accustomed the citizens 
to anarchy and disorder. The magistrates wished to take the 
government both of Church and State into their own hands, and to 
employ religion for political ends. J arel and his followers had been 
successful in destroying the old faith: they had not the requisite 
qualities for giving an orderly constitution to a new church. It was 
at this crisis that John Calvin appeared in Geneva. 

§ 15. Calvin, the leader of the second generation of reformers, was 
korn in 1509 at Noyon in Picardy. Destined by his father for the 
legal profession, he received an excellent education at Paris, Bourges 
and Orleans. It was at Orleans that he turned his attention to 
theology, and became acquainted with the works of the German 

‘reformers. Of these he was no slavish disciple, but with their 
assistance he constructed an independent theological system. ‘The 
persecutions of 1534 drove him from France, and he continued his 
studies in Italy and Germany. In 15386 he produced his greatest work, 
the Institutio Christane Religionis, which he wrote in Latin and 
afterwards translated into French. In the same year he came to 
Geneva, where he was detained against his will by the urgency of 
Farel, who was eager to secure so able a colleague. In Geneva 
Calvin set to work to found a Christian church on the basis laid 
down in the “ Institutes.” But the harshness of his system, and 
the haughty supremacy which he assumed, provoked violent 


AD. 1536-1541. CALVIN IN GENEVA. 71 


opposition. Men were not yet willing to sacrifice that freedom of 
life which was attainable under the new municipal government. 
They inveighed against the “new papacy,” and received support’ 
from Berne, which wished to retain its influence over the liberated 
state. Calvin and Farel, who refused to make the slightest con- 
cessions, were in 1538 condemned to exile. Calvin now resumed 
his literary activity, and for the next three years resided chiefly in 
Strasburg. 

§ 16. But it was soon discovered that his presence was indispensable 
to Geneva. The Roman Catholics were encouraged by these internal 
dissensions to attempt the recovery of the city. An address was 
issued by Cardinal Sadolet, to which Calvin wrote a conclusive 
answer from Strasburg. This achievement increased the number of 
his partisans, who strenuously urged his recall. And the growing 
influence of Berne was alarming to the patriotic supporters of 
independence. ‘Thus political combined with religious motives to 
induce the magistrates to invite Calvin to return. It was with 
ereat reluctance, and only as he believed in obedience to a divine 
call, that he at last accepted the invitation. On the 15th September, 
1541, he returned to Geneva amidst general rejoicing. From this 
time he devoted himself with unequalled energy to the teaching of 
his doctrines and the foundation of a new church organisation. 

The distinguishing feature of the Calvinistic doctrines was the 
development to its logical extreme of the Augustinian doctrine of 
predestination. Men were divided from their birth into two 
great elasses, those who were destined to be saved and those who 
were doomed. to destruction. But as it was impossible to divide 
these classes in this world, Calvin admitted to membership of the 
church all who were willing to conform to its rules. In his 
opposition to Roman Catholicism Calvin was far more irrecon- 
cilable than Luther. He rejected transubstantiation altogether, as 
well as all ritualistic forms and church festivals. Simplicity and 
seriousness were his highest idea, and he made no provision for 
recreation of any kind. The whole hierarchical organisation of 
the old church, with its symbols and ceremonials, found in Calvin 
a most bitter and decided enemy. 

Still more than in doctrine did Calvin differ from Luther in his 
conception of the constitution of the church. ‘The German reformer 
had allowed religious supremacy to fall into the hands of the 
princes, who alone had power to wield it. The system of Calvin 
was far more democratic. He regarded the congregation, the 
community of believers, as the only source of authority upon earth. 
But he would tolerate none of the anarchy which might arise from 
a democratic constitution. The executive power was vested in an 


7 (ad MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. Iv. 


elected consistory, consisting of the clergy and twelve lay elders. 
To prevent the election of unfit persons, the clergy were compelled 
to pass a strict examination, and the elders could only be chosen 
from members of the two councils. The consistory was not only 
the chief ecclesiastical authority, it was also the supreme tribunal 
for the regulation of morals. Under Calvin’s influence the strictest 
laws were enacted and enforced, Dancing and card-playing were 
forbidden under severe penalties, and adultery was punished by 
death. Calvin attached the greatest importance to the education 
of the young. Regular grades of schools were established, which 
taught in turn all the branches of knowledge known to those times. 
This made Geneva the educational centre of western Christendom, 
and extended the influence of Calvinism far beyond the city-walls. 

Calvin was not able to complete his work without opposition. 
A party was formed which aimed at a relaxation of ecclesiastical 
strictness, and wished to bring the church under the control of the 
state. These men, who were known as the “ Libertines,” found 
numerous followers even among the municipal councils. But 
Calvin was able to maintain his supremacy, mainly by the support 
of the numerous French exiles who flocked to Geneva. He treated 
his opponents with merciless severity. Servetus, a Spaniard who 
came to Geneva in 1553, and who was opposed to Calvin only on 
doctrinal points, was publicly burnt as a heretic. Jt was un- 
fortunate that the Protestants could not extend to others that 
toleration which they so convincingly demanded for themselves, 
In spite of his prodigious power, Calvin lived himself in poverty 
till his death in 1564, when his work was continued by his devoted 
disciple, Theodore Beza. 

Calvin’s doctrines were destined to exercise an influence quite 
out of proportion to the sphere of his personal activity. Their 
democratic and aggressive character, while it made them especially 
abhorrent to established governments, equally fitted them to be 
the religion of opponents of those governments. Lutheranism, 
both in Germany and in England, had strengthened the princely 
power; Calvinism, in Scotland and the Netherlands, was destined 
to attack and overthrow that power. Calvinism was the creed of 
rebels; it discarded altogether Luther’s teaching as to the evils of 
empioying force. Its influence is to be traced in the teaching of John 
Knox, in the heroic resistance of the northern Netherlands to Spain, 
in the prolonged struggle of the French Huguenots, and among the 
English Puritans, who organised the Great Rebellion and founded a 
mighty power beyond the Atlantic. Calvin was to the Romance and 
western nations what Luther and Melancthon were to the Germans. 


CHAPTER V. 


RIVALRY BETWEEN FRANCE AND THE HAPSBURGS.— 
j SECOND PERIOD, 


§ 1. Charles V.’s intervention in Tunis. § 2. Francis I. intrigues against 
Charles; allies himself with Clement VII., Henry VIII., James V., and 
Solyman. §3. Outbreak of the war in 1536; French conquest of Savoy ; 
Charles invades Provence; his failure. § 4. Campaign of 1537; truce 
of Nice ; interview at Aigues-Mortes; death of Alessandro de Medici ; 
accession of Cosimo, the first grand duke of Tuscany. § 5. Charles V. 
humbles the Castilian Cortes; suppression of the revolt of Ghent. 
§ 6. Charles V.’s disaster off Algiers; Francis ]. renews the war; cam- 
paigns of 1542 and 1543; treaty of Crespy. § 7. End of Francis I.’s 
reign ; its importance in the history of France. 


§ 1. Arrer settling German affairs by the treaty of Nuremberg, 
Charles V. proceeded to Italy, where he renewed his alliance with 
the pope and the other states. Thence he went by sea to Barcelona, 
and his attention was soon drawn to affairs in Africa. There was 
considerable danger that the Turks might attain that supremacy 
on the Mediterranean coasts, which had belonged to the Moham- 
medans centuries before. Chaireddin or, as he was usually calied, 
Barbarossa, the son of a potter in Lesbes, had taken up the trade 
of a corsair in conjunction with his brothers, and had made him- 
self master of Algiers. Feeling unable to support this power by 
himself, he submitted to the sultan Solyman, who appointed him 
commander of the Turkish fleet. In hig new capacity he interfered in 
a disputed succession to the throne of Tunis. Supporting the cause 
of Alraschid, he drove the rival claimant, Muley Hassan, from 
the kingdom. Then turning against Alraschid, he annexed Tunis 
to the dominions of the Sultan. Muley Hassan meanwhile had 
fled to Spain to implore the assistance of the emperor. Collecting 
a large fleet under the command of Andrea Doria, Charles V. sailed 
to the African coast in 1535, defeated Barbarossa, and restored the 
exiled prince to the throne of Tunis as a vassal of Spain. 

§ 2. While the emperor was thus employed in upholding the cause 
of Christendom against the infidels, his power was threatened by 
the intrignes of his rival, the French king. It was impossible for 
Francis I. to accept with contentment the provisions of the treaty 

5* 


74 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. v. 


of Cambray. Above all, he was determined not to resign his 
pretensions to the duchy of Milan, but to take the earliest opportu- 
nity of re-asserting them. With this end in view, he tried to 
detach the pope from his alliance with the emperor. He offered to 
marry his second son, Henry of Orleans, to Catharine de Medici, 
daughter of Clement VII.’s cousin Lorenzo. In spite of Charles’ 
efforts to prevent it, this marriage, fraught with important conse- 
quences to France, was concluded. But none cf the anticipated 
advantages were reaped from it, because in 1534 Clement VII. 
died, and was succeeded by Paul III. In spite of this disappoint- 
ment Francis continued his intrigues. He endeavoured to secure 
the alliance of Francesco Sforza, who, though duke of Milan 
and married to Charles’ niece, was anxious to free himself from 
imperial tutelage. Maraviglia or, as the French call him, Merveille 


was despatched from France to Milan as French envoy. But the. 


intrigue was discovered by the imperialists, and Francesco Sforza 
was compelled to put Maravizlia to death. This breach of the law 
of nations gave Francis I. what he desired, a pretext for war. He 
formed a new standing army of 42,000 infantry, and looked round 
for alliances against the emperor. He entered into close relations 
with Henry VIII., and with James V. of Scotland. He was 
especially anxious to gain over the German Protestants; he 
invited Melancthon to Paris, and opened negotiations with the 
League of Schmalkalde. But within his own kingdom he was the 
persecutor of Protestants, and the German princes refused to trust 
him. ‘To compensate himself for this he outraged the sentiments 
of Christian Europe by forming an alliance with the Turkish sultan 
Solyman. 

§ 3. In the midst of these warlike preparations, Francis’ position 
was completely altered by the death of Francesco Sforza (Oct. 1536). 
This of course deprived him of his pretext for war in the death of 
Maraviglia, but to make up for this he revived his claim to the 

.duchy of Milan. At the beginning of 1536 a large French army 
was collected on the frontiers, but instead of invading Milan it 
attacked Charles III. of Savoy, whose only offence was that, having 
married the emperor’s sister, he had deserted the French alliance 
for that of Charles. Savoy and Piedmont were speedily conquered, 
but the attack on Milan was still postponed. Charles V. proposed 
a compromise, and offered to give the vacant duchy to Francis’ 
third son, the duke of Angouléme. Francis demanded it for his 
second son, the duke of Orleans; but as being nearer to the crown, 
and.as the husband of Catharine de Medici, he was unacceptable to 
the emperor. By these negotiations Charles obtained time to raise 
money and troops. In June 1536 he appeared in Rome, and there 


— a 


A.D. 1533-1538. CHARLES V. IN PROVENCE. 75 


denounced Francis’ conduct in the most violent terms, and chal- 
lenged him to single combat. At the head of a large army he 
prepared to invade France. ‘The treachery or incapacity of the 
Marquis of Saluces, the French commander in Piedmont, gave him 
an easy passage through that province. On the 25th of July, the 
anniversary of his defeat of Barbarossa, he crossed the frontier and 
entered Provence. His object was to bring the French king toa 
decisive engagement. But Francis I. pursued a more cautious 
policy than could have been expected of him. Occupying strong 
fortified positions at Avignon and Valence, he devastated the 
country before them, and stood strictly on the defensive. The 
conduct of these military operations was left to the Marshal de 
Montmorency, who had suggested them. Want of provisions and 
consequent disease soon produced their effect on the imperial army. 
With his officers and soldiers dying around him, and impregnable 
fortresses in front, Charles had nothing left but to retreat to 
Genoa. There he took ship for Barcelona, and hastened to hide 
his disgrace from the eyes of Kurope. During the campaign the 
dauphin had died, and Henry of Orleans became heir to the French 
throne. 

§ 4. At the beginning of 1537 I'rancis J., declaring the treaty of 
Cambray to be at an end, summoned “Charles of Austria” to 
appear before the parliament of Paris, as being a French vassal in 
Flanders and Artois. On his non-appearance, these provinces were 
declared to be forfeited to France. ‘The campaign which followed 
_this meaningless medieval ceremony was unimportant. An inva- 
sion of Picardy was ended by the exertions of the regent in the 
Netherlands, Mary of Hungary, who obtained a truce for ten months 
extending to her territories only. On the side of Italy, the French 
re-conquered Piedmont, and Solyman, in accordance with his treaty, 
sent. Barbarossa to ravage the coasts of Naples. But Francis’ 
consciousness of the odium which the Turkish alliance brought 
upon him imelined him to peace, and he postponed the threatened 
invasion of Milan. Paul III. eagerly undertook the task of 
mediation. Charles V. was anxious to put a stop to the Turkish 
advance, and in 1538 a truce for ten years was arranged at Nice, by 
which each party kept his conquests. Thus the unfortunate duke of 
Savoy remained excluded from his territories, which he had done 
nothing to forfeit. Soon afterwards Charles, on his return journey 
to Spain, was driven by a storm to Aigues-Mortes. Francis 
hurried to meet him, and the two rivals, so lately engaged in open 
war and apparently imbued with deadly enmity for each other, 
passed three days together on terms of chivalrous cordiality. 

Besides negotiating the truce of Nice, Paul III. advanced the 


76 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. V 


interests of his family by securing for his grandson, Ottavio Farnese, 
the hand of the emperor’s natural daughter, Margaret. She was 
the widow of Alessandro de Medici, the last male of the direct 
descendants of Cosimo, the founder of the house. Alessandro was 
murdered in 1437 by his kinsman Lorenzino, who hoped to 
supplant him, but who was driven by sudden terror to take refuge in 
Venice. The government of Florence now fell to Cosimo de Medici, 
the representative of a collateral line descended from Lorenzo, 
brother of the elder Cosimo. He subsequently annexed Siena and 
southern Tuscany to Florence, and thus founded the grand-duchy 
of Tuscany, which was held by his descendants till 1737. 

§ 5. After the striking interview at Aigues-Mortes, Charles V. 
proceeded to Spain, where a dispute with the Castilian Cortes 
enabled him to humble that ancient assembly. Henceforth the 
nobles and clergy were excluded, as paying no taxes, and the Cortes 
consisted only of the deputies of eighteen cities, who could offer no 
determined resistance to the royal power (1539). About the same 
time Charles received news of a revolt in Ghent, the most flourishing 
city in Flanders. The Flemish cities had found their old indepen- 
dence sadly curtailed when they fell under the powerful dukes of 
Burgundy; but their lot was still worse under the house of Haps- 
burg. In 1536 the city of Ghent, relying on its ancient privileges, 
refused to contribute to a tax demanded by Mary of Hungary. 
The Regent at once ordered the arrest of all citizens of Ghent 
throughout the Netherlands. An appeal to the emperor being 
disregarded, the Gantois took up arms, established their indepen- 
dence, and wrote to Francis I. to offer him their aid in becoming 
sovereign of the Netherlands. This offer was refused by Francis, 
who, under the influence of Montmorency, was now as anxious to be 
on good terms with Charles as he had previously been to quarrel 
with him. Hoping to establish a claim on the emperor’s gratitude, 
le divulged the whole negotiations, and gave him a free passage 
through France to Flanders. In France, Charles was treated with 
niagnificent ‘hospitality, and conciliated his host by a pretended 
intention to give Milan to the dauphin Henry, formerly duke of 
Orleans. Arrived in Flanders, Charles V. promptly put down the 
rebellion and deprived the Gantois of all their ancient privileges. 
Having thus gained his end, he refused to acknowledge his 
obligations to France, and denied having made any promise about 
Milan. Francis I. found himself duped; he had lost the support 
of Ghent, and was no nearer to the acquisition of Milan. _Mont- 
morency, on whom the blame of his short-sighted confidence fell, 
was degraded from office, and the king lay in wait for the first 
opportunity to renew his war against the emperor. 


AD, 1538-1544. RENEWAL OF THE WAR. Vit 


§ 6. Meanwhile Charles passed from Flanders to Germany, and 
thence to Italy, intent on a new expedition to Africa. The corsairs 
had resumed their incursions on the Mediterranean coast, and there 
was no prospect of peace and order until the pirate state of Algiers 
was reduced. With a magnificent fleet and army Charles set 
sail for Algiers in October, 1541. But he found more formidable 
opponents in winds and waves than in the infidels. A great storm 
shattered his fleet, and drove him with a small remnant of his forces 
to Spain. 

This disaster, the greatest which Charles had yet experienced, 
gave fresh courage to Francis I. It also gave him an opportunity 
of renewing that alliance with the Sultan which had been broken 
off in 1538. A Spanish renegade, Rincon, was despatched to 
Constantinople, but on his passage through Lombardy, he was seized 
by the Marquis del Guasto, governor of Milan, and put to death. 
This gave Francis his desired pretext for hostilities. An alliance 
with the duke of Cleve, to whom Charles V. refused the investiture 
of Guelders, offered the French great advantages in an attack on 
the Netherlands. James V. of Scotland was closely allied with 
France, having married first Trancis’ daughter Madeleine, and 
afterwards Mary of Guise. ‘The Scandinavian countries now began 
to play a part in European history, and both Christian IIT. of 
Denmark and Gustavus I. of Sweden made treaties with france. 
Henry VIII., however, jealous of French influence in Scotland; 
refused to renew his alliance, but the Sultan, who was at this time 
gaining great successes in Hungary, was more complaisant. 

Francis declared war in 1542, raised five large armies, and made 
% simultaneous attack upon the Netherlands and Roussillon. 
Charles duke of Orleans, the commander of the former expedition, 
tired of a campaign of sieges, hurried off suddenly to the Pyrenees, 
where he heard that his brother, the dauphin, was going to fight a 
pitched battle. But the invasion of Roussillon was foiled by the 
resistance of Perpignan; and the I’rench retired into quarters 
without any success proportioned to tneir exertions. In 1543 
Charles V. arrived in Germavy determined to reduce the duke of 
Cleve. The latter applied for aid to the League of Schmalkalde, 
but Charles was lucky enough to gain over Philip of Hesse, and 
the application was refused. Cleve was conquered and the duke 
forced into humiliating submission, while Francis made no effort 
to assist him till too late. An attack upon Nice, the last 
possession of the duke of Savoy, by the combined French and 
Turkish fleets was unsuccessful. In 1544 Charles arranged with 
Henry VIII. a simultaneous invasion of France. ‘The English 
king crossed over, but instead of advancing towards Paris he 


78 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. V. 


laid siege to Boulogne, which did not surrender till September. 
Charles, disregarding the fact that his army in Piedmont suffered 
a severe defeat at Cerisoles, invaded Champagne. He advanced 
within two days’ march of Paris, which was thrown into the 
utmost consternation, when Charles evinced a sudden desire for 
peace. His motives are not easy to follow, but he probably was 
indignant that Henry VIII. failed to fulfil his engagement; and he 
also wished to end the dreaded alliance between French and Turks, 
and to have his own hands free to settle matters with the German 
Protestants. Francis was no less willing to come to terms, and 
the treaty of Crespy was concluded (10 September, 1544). By 
this all conquests made since the truce of Nice were restored. 
Francis renounced all claims to Naples, Flanders and Artois, and 
Charles consented to a formal renunciation of the Duchy of 
Burgundy. Besides this, the emperor promised the hand of his 
daughter or his niece to the duke of Orleans, who was to receive 
as his wife’s dowry either the Netherlands and Franche-Comté, 
or the duchy of Milan. On the completion of this compact 
Francis was bound to restore Savoy and Piedmont. to Charles III. 

§ 7. This treaty which gave unexpectedly good terms to France, 
brings to an end the direct rivalry between Charles V. and Francis I. 
The latter’s remaining years were mainly occupied with a war against 
Henry VIII., which was carried on partly in Scotland and partly 
round Boulogne, Boulogne was at last surrendered under Edward VI. 
and peace made between England and France. Francis was dis- 
appointed in the advantages which were held out by the treaty of 
Crespy. The duke of Orleans, his favourite son, died (September, 
1545) before either of the proposed marriages had been completed. 
Francis attempted to revive his own pretensions to Milan, but the 
emperor disregarded them. He was compelled to content himself 
with retaining Savoy and Piedmont, which he was no longer bound 
to surrender. On the 31st of March, 1547, Francis I. died at the 
» age of 53, after a stormy reign of 32 years. 

“Francis I. was too absorbed in foreign politics to pay much 
attention to domestic affairs, yet, in spite of this, his reign is a 
period of considerable importance in the development of France. 
The king failed to attain his dynastic objects. He never acquired 
Naples, and he was forced to relinquish Milan. But he was very 
successful in defending the French frontiers, and in creating a 
national spirit which aimed at their extension. Under Francis, 
too, the central power of the crown was vastly increased. The 
church was rendered subject by the Concordat of 1516. The 
estates were of little importance and were hardly ever summoned. 
Even local and municipal independence was restricted or carefully 


a; 


A.D. 1544-1547. DEATH OF FRANCIS I. 79 


watched. Large revenues were derived, not only from the taille, 
but also from the sale of offices and from the clergy. <A native 
infantry was formed on a larger scale than had previously existed. 
And the king was not unpopular, but was served with willing 
devotion. His magnificent court, his patronage of art and litera- 
ture, and, above all, his martial spirit, made him the true reflex and 
representative of the national life. Maximilian I. once declared 
that the emperor was a king of kings, because no one felt bound to 
obey him; that the king of Spain was a king of men, because, 
though opposed, he was still obeyed; but the French king was a 
king of beasts, for no one dared to oppose him. 

Franvis I. was the originator of the traditional French policy, 
afterwards so successfully pursued by Richelieu, of being Protestant 
abroad and Catholic at home. His rivalry to the house of Haps- 
burg made him anxious to conciliate the League of Schmalkalde, 
but at the same time he was careful to repress every tendency to 
reform in his own kingdom, He aroused the anger of the pope by 
his alliance with the heretic Henry VIII., but he made amends by 
a furious persecution of French Protestants. In his later years his 
measures became more and more barbarous, and one of his last acts 
was the wholesale extermination of the Vaudois (April, 1545). 
Among the Frenchmen who were driven by his severity into exile 
was John Calvin, the apostle of Geneva. 


80 MODERN EUROPE. 


CHAPTER VI. 


CHARLES V. AND THE GERMAN REFORMATION. RENEWED 
WAR WITH FRANCE. 1532-1559. 


§ 1. Progress of the Reformation in Germany after the treaty of Nurem- 
berg; the Anabaptists in Miinster. § 2. Attempted compromise; Diet 
of Ratisbon ; its failure; the archbishop of Cologne. $§ 3. Charles 
prepares for a struggle against the Protestants; secures the adhesion 
of Maurice of Saxony; death of Luther ; Schmalkaldic war; battle of 
Muhlberg. § 4. Councilsof Trent; the emperor quarrels with Paul 
III.; the Interim. § 5. Charles’ "attempt to establish despotism ; 
reaction in Germany ; conduct of Maurice of Saxony. §6. The German 
princes obtain assistance from Henry II. of France; Charles narrowly 
escapes capture at Innspruck ; treaty of Passau; French capture Metz, 
Toul, and Verdun. . § 7. Charles fails in the siege of Metz; Albert of 
Brandenburg ; death of Maurice of Saxony at Sievershausen; kis 
character. § 8. Religious peace of Augsburg. § 9. Charles V. dis- 
pirited by his failures ; his abdication. § 10. Pope Paul IV.; he 
provokes France to make war with Philip Il. ; Alva in Italy ; success 
of the Spaniards. § 11. Waron the French frontier ; Spanish victories 
at-St. Quentin and Grayvelines; capture of Calais by Guise; treaty of 
Cateau-Cambresis ; importance of the treaty. 


§ 1. Tue treaty of Nuremberg (1532) secured toleration for the 
German Protestants, and imposed no restrictions upon the extension of 
their power. ‘The emperor was unsuccessful in his efforts to induce 
the pope to summon a general council, and the renewal of the war 
with France kept him from any interference in the affairs of Germany. 
The Catholic princes were not united, and there was no armed 
power in the country which could. hope to compete with the League 
of Schmalkalde. Circumstances were thus very favourable for the 
Protestants, and they soon gained an important victory in Wurtem- 
berg. Duke Ulrich of Wurtemberg had been expelled in 1519, 
and his territories had since then been administered by the House 
of Hapsburg. But during his exile Ulrich had shown an inclination 
to adopt the reformed doctrines, and his son Christopher, who had 
none of his father’s unpopularity, was a decided Protestant. Or 
the motion of Phil!p of Hesse, and in spite of the opposition of the 
elector of Saxony, their cause was adopted by the League of 


* 


On 


A.D. 1532-1539. PROGRESS OF GERMAN PROTESTANTISM. 81 


Schmalkalde. The dissolution of the Swabian League early in 
1434 gave the desired opportunity. By a sudden invasion the 
Austrian troops were overpowered, Wurtemberg was restored to 
Ulrich, and the Lutheran church established in the duchy. Ferdi- 
nand of Austria, taken completely by surprise, was compelled to 
sanction these events by the peace of Kadan (1434). ‘This was a 
very great success. Protestantism was introduced in the midst of 
the south German states, and the House of Hapsburg suffered a 
severe defeat. 

In this year the anabaptists established themselves at Miinster 
under John of Leyden. ‘They taught the most extreme doctrines, 
such as the community of property and of women, and the city 
became the scene of anarchy and the mosé“insane excesses. The 
movement was put down by force in 1485 and the ringleaders 
executed. ‘The reaction caused by these unfortunate events did 
little to stay the progress of reform. In the next two years Protes- 
tantism was accepted in Baden, Anhalt, Augsburg, and a number 
of towns both in northern ang southern Germany. But in 1439 
occurred the greatest extension of the new doctrines, owing to 
dynastic changes in Albertine Saxony and Brandenburg. George 
duke of Saxony had beef as keen a supporter of orthodoxy as his 
relatives of the Ernestine branch were of Lutheranism. So averse 
was he to religious changes that he endeavoured by will to dis- 
inherit his, brother Henry and to leave his dominions to the 
Uapsburgs. But all his efforts proved fruitless, and on his death (17 
April, 1539) Henry obtained undisturbed possession of the duchy 
of Saxony, where he introduced the new faith to which he already 
belonged. Joachim I., margrave of Brandenburg, had endeavoured 
to preserve the Catholic religion, and had married his two sons, 
Joachim and Jobn, to Catholic princesses. But after his death 
(1435) John, who obtained Brandenburg-Neumark, at once joined 
the League of Schmalkalde and established the reformed church. 
The elder brother, Joachim II., who succeeded to the electorate, 
proceeded more cautiously. While he himself remained a Catholic, 
he offered no impediment to the teaching of the reformers; and 
finally, in 1439, consented to the definite adoption of Protestantism. 
Thus the Reformation was successfully established in almost the 
whole of northern and central Germany. In the south, Austria, 
Bavaria, the Palatinate, and the Rhenish electorates, remained 
orthodox, while in the north Catholicism could reckon only one 
supporter, Henry duke of Brunswick. 

§ 2. The progress of the Reformation was regarded with serious 
misgivings by Charles V. The political unity of Germany was one 
of his chief objects, but it could never be attained without religious 


82 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. VI. 


unity. In the face of the danger threatened both by France and 
the ‘lurks, it was impossible for him to alienate the Protestants by 
coercion. Measures of conciliation were therefore tried, but as yet 
they had been unsuccessful. The pope, Paul III., made tentative 
offers of a council in some Italian town, but the German princes 
were resolute in their refusal. The Vice-Chancellor Held, acting as 
Charles’ agent, so far from being able to reconcile opposing parties, 
only formed a separate league of Catholic princes at Nuremberg in 
1539. Thus Germany was divided into two hostile camps, and 
Held’s conduct only lessened: the chances of a reconciliation. But 
in 154] Charles himself appeared in Germany to conduct his own 
affairs, At the diet of Ratisbon a serious effort was made to 
bring about a compromise. Circumstances never appeared so 
promising. ‘Tne pope was represented by the most moderate of the 
cardinals, Contarini, the representative of a party at Rome which 
desired to reform the church. Luther was not present, and his 
place was taken by the more conciliatory Melancthon. The 
Catholics too put forward their more moderate theologians, Gropper 
and Pflug. But, in spite of this, religious differences proved too 
wide to be bridged over. Charles was convinced that nothing was 
to be gained by his present policy, and nothing was left for him 
but the employment of force. Henceforth this necessity was more 
and more impressed upon him; but as yet circumstances compelled 
him to temporise. The Turks were on the point of annexing 
Hungary, and the Protestants must be conciliated at all cost. The 
diet therefore ended by confirming the treaty of Nuremberg, 
putting an end to all processes against Protestants, and admitting 
members of both creeds to the Imperial Chamber. 

The Protestant princes were completely blinded as to the 
emperor’s real designs ; they regarded the recess of the diet as a 
permanent security. Henry of Brunswick, who had obtained a 
decree against the town of Goslar, refused to obey the recess. . The 
league of Schmalkalde took up arms against him and drove him 
from his territories, where Protestantism was at once established. 
This event caused great uneasiness to the emperor, which was in- 
creased by occurrences in Cologne. The aged archbishop, Hermann 
von der Wied, hitherto a moderate member of the Catholic party, 
gradually manifested his inclination to go over to the reformed faith. 
In spite of remonstrances from the chapter and the municipal 
authority, he sanctioned grave religious alterations and allowed full 
liberty to the Protestant preachers. This attitude on the part of a 
great prince of the church aroused the gravest misgivings. At 
present Charles’ hands were tied by the war with France, but in 1544 
the peace of Crespy set him free, and he set out for Germany 


A.D. 1541-1546. THE SCHMALKALDIC WAR. 83 


determined to put down the League of Schmalkalde and to establish 
at the same time unity and submission to the central power. 

§ 3. Although his mind was now fully made up, Charles proceeded 
with the utmost caution, and concealed his real designs as long as 
possible. ‘The king of I’rance was pledged by the peace of Crespy 
to assist in the putting down of heresy, and a secret treaty was 
easily concluded with the pope. On the support of the Catholic 
princes the emperor could rely, but he was also able to gain over 
some of the Protestants. ‘To them he was careful to represent that 
his objects were political, not religious, that he had no desire to 
repress reform, but only to put down the haughty and independent 
League of Schmalkalde. Jolin and Albert of Brandenburg, indignant 
at the treatment of Henry of Brunswick, readily joined the emperor. 
But a more important ally was Maurice duke of Saxony. He had 
succeeded his father in 1541, and, though an avowed Protestant, .he 
soon adopted an independent attitude. In 1542 he withdrew froin 
the League of Schmalkalde, though he still promised his aid if the 
interests of religion were threatened. But with him, as with 
Charles V., religion was altogether subordinate to politics ; his guiding 
motive was personal ambition. Jealousy of the Ernestine branch 
of his family and desire of territorial aggrandisement combined to 
induce him to join the emperor, with whom he concluded .a close 
alliance. Meanwhile the Protestant leaders were quite in the dark 
as to Charles’ designs, While he was collecting an army, he continued 
to hold diets, where schemes of compromise were discussed, though 
on each occasion the Catholics adopted a bolder and more aggressive 
tone. 

Before the final overthrow of the peace, which he had so consistently 
enjoined, Martin Luther died on 18th February, 1546. In July 
Charles declared war by issuing the imperial ban against the leaders 
of the League of Schmalkalde. They now collected their forces, and 
if they had attacked the emperor at once they must have been 
victorious. But they were weakened by the evil results of a divided 
command. Philip of Hesse, the most active and able of the Pro- 
testant princes, urged an immediate attack, but he was foiled by the 
opposition of his cautious and irresolute colleague, the elector of 
Saxony.. This gave Charles time to receive reinforcements from 
Italy and the Netherlands, though he continued to avoid a battle. 
Meanwhile Maurice, in conjunction with Ferdinand of Austria, in- 
vaded the Saxon electorate, which was speedily overrun. ‘This news 
at once dispersed the army of the League, and the elector John 
Frederick hurried to the defence of his own dominions, Charles V.; 
taking advantage of the confusion among his enemies, reduced 
southern Germany to subjection. Meanwhile John Frederick had 


84 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. VI. 


turned the tables on Maurice by attacking the duchy of Saxony, 
where Dresden and Leipzig alone held out. In April, 1547, Charles 
marched to the assistance of Maurice, and mainly through the latter’s 
strategy won a complete victory at Miihlberg. ‘The elector himself 
was taken prisoner.. After suffering brutal treatment he was com- 
pelled to sign the capitulation of Wittenberg, by which he resigned 
his electoral title and his territories to the emperor. ‘These were 
conferred by Charles upon Maurice as the reward of his services, 
and thus the Saxon electorate was transferred from the Ernestine to 
the Albertine line. A few weeks later Philip of Hesse was compelled 
to surrender, his personal safety being guaranteed by Maurice and 
the elector of Brandenburg. But Charles, disregarding this, threw 
him into prison. Henry of Brunswick was released from captivity 
and restored to his duchy. 

§ 4. By these great successes Charles realised his grand object 
and became supreme in Germany. He could now insist upon that 
religious uniformity on which he intended to base political cen- 
tralisation. But just at this moment, when everything seemed 
favourable, he forfeited the most necessary alliance, that of the 
pope. Paul III. was anxious to suppress Protestantism, but he 
was unwilling to see Charles powerful enough tv dictate to the 
papacy. livery advantage gained by the emperor terrified the pope. 
The Council of Trent had been summoned in 1545, but against 
Charles’ wishes questions of practical reform were postponed to- 
doctrinal matters, and these were settled in the most uncompromising 
form. In March, 1547, in defiance of imperial remonstrances, the 
council was transferred from Trent to Bologna. Before the battle of 
Muhlberg the papal contingent was withdrawn from the imperial 
army. In his indignation, Charles despatched an embassy to Bologna 
in January, 1548, to declare that all proceedings of the council were 
null and void. Other circumstances occurred to inflame the quarrel. 
Paul I1I.’s son Piero Luigi Farnese had been invested with the cities 
_of Parma and Piacenza. His tyranny made him detested, and he 
was assassinated. ‘The governor of Milan at once took possession 
of Piacenza in the emperor’s name. Paul III. accused Gonzaga of 
complicity in his son’s murder, and called upon Charles to invest 
his grandson Ottavio Farnese with Parma and Piacenza. This being 
refused, the pope declared the two cities reunited to the holy see, 
thus making the emperor guilty of an attack upon the church, 

This bitter quarrel with the pope, and the impossibility of 
obtaining a satisfactory council, compelled Charles V. to settle the 
religious affairs of Germany by himself. In May, 1548, he brought 
before the diet of Augsburg the system of faith to be observed in 
Germany, which, from its avowedly temporary character, was called 


A.D. 1547-1548. THE INTERIM. 85 


the Interim, The doctrines contained in it were substantially 
Catholic, but to the Protestants were conceded, among other points, 
the communion in both kinds and the marriage of the clergy. 
This high-handed attempt on the part of a temporal prince to 
formulate a religious creed excited the greatest astonishment in 
Germany, while it further exasperated the pope. But by a dexterous 
manceuvre on the part ofthe archbishop of Mainz it was accepted by 
the astounded diet. ‘The Interim shows clearly how Charies’ head had 
been turned by his success, and how little conception he had of the 
real meaning and force of religious belief. It was almost equally 
distasteful to both Catholics and Protestants, and, though formally 
adopted by several princes, it was hardly anywhere really enforced. 
Maurice of Saxony was the first to protest against it, and in many 
parts of Germany it could only be introduced by force of arms. 

§ 5. If Charles V.’s religious policy was unpopular, his other 
measures were far more so. His treatment of the imprisoned princes 
was an outrage not only on justice but on humanity. And the political 
changes which he introduced roused feelings of profound mistrust. 
The diet of Augsburg, meeting just after the emperor’s great suc- 
cesses, waS numerously attended by prelates and princes who had 
little courage to oppose his will. Almost all his proposals were 
accepted. The Imperial Chamber was _ recoustituted and the 
appointment of its members vested in the emperor. ‘The Nether- 
lands were united with the empire as a tenth circle, while they 
retained their old institutions. A new military treasury was 
formed under the complete control of the emperor. Thus Charles V. 
succeeded in establishing a central authority which none of his 
predecessors had possessed for centuries. 

But princely independence was too firmly rooted in Germany to 
submit without astruggle. Charles’ high-handed measures produced 
a reaction. Of this the representative was Maurice of Saxony. He 
found that he had purchased the electorate at the price of universal 
unpopularity. He had aided io subject Germany to a Spanish 
despot, whose troops conducted themselves as in a conquered country. 
And his compliance had secured him no influence with the emperor ; 
he could not even obtain the release of his father-in-law, the 
landgrave of Hesse, whose continued imprisonment was a stain 
upon his honour. To regain his lost reputation he determined to 
become.the champion of German independence, and to strengthen 
this cause by linking it with that of religious freedom. But he was 
careful to disguise his change of policy until circumstances were 
ripe for action. 

Meanwhile Charles V., blind to the growing reaction, was 
determined to complete his schemes. The Interim was insisted 


86 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. VI. 


upon. Even Maurice felt compelled to accept it, though it was 
modified for Saxony by Melancthon. The south-German cities which 
opposed ‘its introduction were subdued by Spanish soldiers, and the 
municipal government altered to suit the emperor’s wishes. But 
in northern Germany, where the lead was taken by Magdeburg, for 
a time the metropolis of Protestantism, the opposition was less 
easily suppressed. Charles was encouraged in his designs by the 
death of his enemy Paul III. (1549) and the electon of his easy- 
going successor Julius III. The new pope was willing to resume 
the Council of Trent, to which Charles looked for a confirmation of 
his ideas of religious unity. 

§ 6. The emperor now aimed at making his vast power perpetual 
by securing the succession of his son Philiptothe empire. But here 
he was confronted by the steady opposition of his brother Ferdinand, 
who was already king of the Romans, and who refused to yield to 
the pretensions of his nephew. ‘This dispute encouraged Maurice of 
Saxony to develop his schemes. He refused to appear at the diet of 
Augsburg, because the landgrave was not released. He had accepted 
the task of forcing the Interim on Magdeburg, and laid siege to the 
city. But this was intended only as a blind;’ he did not press the 
siege, while he used it as a pretext for collecting an independent 
army. He was joined by the margraves of Brandenburg, by 
William of Hesse, Philip’s son, and by John Albert of Mecklenburg. 
These princes made overtures to Henry IL. of France, and on 15th 
January, 1552, concluded with him the treaty of Friedewalde. By 
this the French-speaking cities of Metz, ‘oul, Verdun and Cambray 
were to be ruled by Henry as imperial vicar, and he undertook in 
return to assist the princes in their war against the emperor. In 
consequence of this treaty the French king assumed the title of 
Defender of the Liberties of Germany. 

Just before this, Magdeburg had surrendered to Maurice on easy 
terms. In March, 1552, he was able to commence the war. He 
took Augsburg and restored the Lutheran Church, While engaged 
‘in a conference with Ferdinand at Linz, he heard that the emperor 
was collecting troops. Determined to strike a speedy blow, he 
marched towards Tyrol, took the fortress of Ehrenberg, which 
commanded the pass, and arrived at Innspruck only a few hours 
after Charles had fled in haste. But for a mutiny among the 
troops at Ehrenberg the emperor must have been captured. As it 
was the late tyrant of Germany became suddenly a powerless exile 
in Styria. Utterly humbled and dispirited, he left the necessary 
negotiations to Ferdinand, who concluded the treaty of Passau in 
July, 1552. The elector of Saxony and the landgrave of Hesse 
were to be released ; the Lutherans were to be allowed undisturbed 


A.D. 1549-1553. MAURICE OF SAXONY. 87 


exercise of their religion, and to be admitted to the Imperial 
Chamber ; a diet was to meet in six months to arrange, if possible, 
a permanent settlement. Albert of Brandenburg, who was still in 
arms as the ally of Maurice, was to be admitted to peace on these 
terms. Charles, not without great reluctance, consented to sign the 
treaty. The supremacy so lately established in Germany was 
shattered, and the schemes which seemed so near success were for 
ever foiled. The Council of Trent, which had met again in 1551, 
separated in fright at the news of the confederates’ advance, 

Maurice’s marvellous success was sullied by his unpatriotic con- 
cessions to the French. In all probability he never contemplated a 
permanent annexation of the “three bishoprics” to France. His idea 
was that the interests of the French king and the German princes, 
as opponents of the House of Hapsburg, were identical, and that in 
humbling that house they could work harmoniously. But Henry 
II. was less disinterested than was announced in his manifesto. No 
sooner had Maurice taken the field than the constable Montmorency 
with a large force entered Lorraine, and speedily occupied Toul, 
Verdun and Nancy. The guardianship of the young duke of 
Lorraine was taken from his mother, Charles V.’s niece, and given to 
the count of Vaudemont, an adherent of France. Metz, the grand 
object of the campaign, was taken only by a deceitful stratagem, and 
Henry II. entered it in triumph (April, 1552). The fortress which 
had hitherto been the cutpost of Germany was henceforward to be 
the great defence of France. ‘The command was given to the 
ablest of French soldiers, Francis of Guise. ‘There was no mention 
made of the imperial vicarship or of a reservation of the rights 
of the empire, which had been stipulated in the treaty of Friede- 
walde, 

§ 7. The news of these events aroused Charles V. to indignation 
that the son of his old rival should gain successes where Francis I. had 
failed. Leaving affairs in Germany to take their course, he collected 
an army and advanced against Metz in October, 1552. On the 
way he was fortunate enough to gain over Albert of Brandenburg, 
who remained in arms in spite of the peace of Passau, and who had 
lately been in close alliance with France. The ability and energy 
of Francis of Guise defeated all Charles’ efforts to take Metz. The 
bitter cold of winter proved very fatal to the Spanish and Italian 
soldiers. In January, 1553, it was found necessary to retire. Thus 
the grand border fortresses of Metz, Toul and Verdun passed from 
Germany to France, to become the basis of later acquisitions in 
the same direction. Their loss was the natural fruit of German 
disunion, 

This great reverse, combined as it was with a Turkish invasion 


88 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. VI. 


in the east and considerable losses in Italy, seems to have reduced 
Charles V. to reckless despair. He no longer cared to pursue a 
consistent policy, when success appeared so hopeless. He was not 
unwilling to avenge himself on Germany by sowing the seeds of 
civil war. Regardless of all his duties as a ruler, he encouraged the 
lawless actions of Albert of Brandenburg, who supported himself by 
constant. warfare. ‘Thus he alienated all the German princes, both 
Catholic and Protestant. His brother Ferdinand was determined 
to support order and to carry out the treaty of Passau. A league 
of princes was formed at Heidelberg with these objects in view. 
They were determined not to continue the connection with 
Spain by electing Philip, and to exclude Spanish influence from 
the government of Germany. But Chatles V. was wholly un- 
influenced by this, and continued his connection witty the disturbers 
of the public peace. 

It became necessary, if the peace of Passau were to have any 
effect, to oppose Albert of Brandenburg by force. Maurice of 
Saxony, who was more responsible for the treaty than any one else, 
and who regarded the margrave as a personal rival, undertook the 
task. He entered Brunswick, where Albert had allied himself with 
the enemies of duke Henry, and won a complete victory at Sievers- 
hausen (July, 1553). But in the battle he received a musket 
wound which proved fatal. Maurice was only in his thirty-second 
year, yet he had played a great part in a crisis of German history. 
He defeated and humbled the greatest potentate in Hurope at a 
time when the world seemed to be at his feet. He freed Germany 
from the dreaded despotism of the foreigner. Had he lived longer 
much of the mystery which shrouded his character would have 
been cleared away. The Protestants, in spite of his services, always 
regarded him with suspicion, and this was well justified. He had 
no real sympathy for the religion to which he belonged. His 
motives were purely political, and his two main objects were his own 
~ agerandisement and the independence of the princely class of which 
"he wasa member. It was fortunate for his reputation that with 
his last projects the interests of Germany were bound up; had he 
died just after the Schmalkaldic war he would have come down to 
history merely as a successful traitor. Maurice of Saxony must be 
regarded as the aptest German pupil of that school of politicians 
and diplomatists which had been founded in Italy and whose creed 
is formulated in the Prince of Machiavelli. Maurice was succeeded 
by his brother Augustus. John Frederick made a last effort to 
induce Charles V. to restore him to his electorate. Augustus, 
more moderate than his brother, made concessions of territory 
which satisfied his Ernestine relatives. But the electorate and 


A.D, 1555. RELIGIOUS PEACE OF AUGSBURG. &9 


duchy remained in the hands of the Albertine line, to aevelop 
ultimately into the kingdom of Saxony. 

§ 8. Maurice’s death did not terminate the war, but rather en- 
couraged the aggressions of Albert of Brandenburg. The task of 
opposing him now devolved on the aged Henry of Brunswick, who 
became reconciled with his subjects, and at last granted toleration to 
the Lutheran religion. Albert, defeated in several engagements, was 
compellec in 1554 to retire to France, where he entered the service 
of HenryII. The diet, which had been stipulated in the treaty of 
Passau, but which had been delayed by the prolonged hostilities, 
met at last in February, 1555, at Augsburg, under the presidency 
of Ferdinand of Austria. Its task was to arrange a permanent 
religious peace. ‘The toleration secured to the Lutherans at Passau 
was confirmed. The Public Peace was renewed, and the Imperial 
Chamber was to contain members of both creeds in equal proportion. 
But a great difficulty arose as to the disposal of Church property. In 
the Lutheran States this property had been secularised, and it was 
arranged that all secnlarisations which had taken place before 1552 
should be confirmed. But the Catholics were resolute to prevent 
any similar alienations from their church in the future. ‘They 
insisted on the so-called Ecclesiastical Reservation, by which if any 
prelate went over to the reformed church he should resign his office 
and all the patronage connected with it. The Protestants refused 
to accept this; and as no agreement could be arrived at, Ferdinand 
took the matter into his own hands. ‘The Ecclesiastical Reserva- 
tion was included in the treaty, but the protest of the Protestants 
was also included. 

‘Thus the religious peace of Augsburg could not be, as intended, 
a permanent settlement of the questions at issue. The fixing of 
an arbitrary date, 1552, as the limit of the progress of reform was 
too artificial to be really binding, ‘The treaty was the work of the 
princes, and paid no regard to the interests of the people. It did 

not concede individual freedom of conscience, but only the right of 
the prince to fix the religion of his subjects. The principle estab- 
lished was the cujus regio ejus religio which was laid down first at 
the diet of Speier in 1526. And the toleration which was the great 
gain from the treaty applied only to adherents of the confession of 
Augsburg, i.e. the Lutheran Protestants. There was no concession 
made to the followers of Zwingli or Calvin, who were now the most 
active and progressive of the Protestant sects. But in spite of these 
defects the treaty of Augsburg was the basis of religious and 
political life in Germany for more than half a century, and its 
omissions were hardly realised till they gave birth to the Thirty 
Years’ War. 

6 


90 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. VI. 


§ 9. Charles V. was at this time in Brussels, the capital of the 
Netherlands, where he had been born, and which he always preferred 
to his other dominions. His health was already broken, and the 
news of the treaty of Augsburg announced to him the failure of his 
dearest schemes. Not only were all hopes of reviving German 
unity and establishing a strong Hapsburg monarchy at an end, but 
the Netherlands, which he had united to the empire in 1548, were 
separated again by the Augsburg diet. The princes were resolutely 
opposed to all the dynastic designs of their Spanish ruler. Outside 
Germany, too, events occurred which added to Charles’ despair. He 
had been forced to conclude the truce of Vaucelles with Henry IL., 
and thus virtually to give his sanction to French aggressions. The 
marriage of his son Philip to Mary Tudor, by which it had been 
hoped to obtain for the Hapsburgs another crown, had turned out 
il]. Philip was unpopular in England, and ali Mary’s hopes of an 
heir proved disappointments. ‘lo propitiate the Deity the queen 
encouraged that persecution of the Protestants which assuredly 
did nothing to conciliate the people to Spanish rule; and in Rome 
pope Julius JII. died in 1555, and was succeeded by Paul IV., the 
determined opponent of the Hapsburgs. 

All these events combined to induce Charles to carry out a 
design already entertained of retiring from the cares of government. 
On 25th October he appeared in the grand hall at Brussels, leaning on 
the shoulder of William of Orange, and, amidst the tears of the 
spectators, formally resigned the Netherlands and the Italian 
provinces to his son Philip. In January, 1556, the crown of Spain 
was similarly transferred. An embassy was sent to Germany to 
announce his abdication of the empire, and to commend his brother 
Ferdinand to the electors. In September, 1556, Charles sailed to 
Spain and retired to San Juste, where a retreat had been already 
prepared for him. ‘There he lived, still concentrating his attention 
on European politics, till his death on the 21st of September, 1558. 

§10. Philip Ll. immediately on his accession found himself con- 
fronted by a great European war. This was brought on by the head- 
strong violence of pope PaulIV. The hereditary attachment of his 
family (Caraffa) to the Angevin cause, personal enmity to Charles V., 
and the desire to free Italy from the Spaniard, all combined to 
inspire the aged pope with the bitterest antipathy to the Hapsburgs. 
This was increased by the intelligence that Ferdinand, in the 
treaty of Augsburg, had consented to give toleration to the German 
Protestants. Paul IV. refused to confirm the treaty ; in his blind 
rage he even refused to support Mary Tudor in her efforts to restore 
Roman Catholicism in England. He determined to reverse the 
policy of Julius JI., and to call the French into Italy to expel 


ae. i. ae 


A.D. 1555-1558. BATTLE OF ST. QUENTIN. 91 


the Spaniards. By holding out hopes of the conquest of Naples, 
and by gaining over the influential family of Guise, he induced 
Henry Il. to break the truce of Vaucelles, and to conclude an 
alliance with the papacy. The duke of Guise was sent with an 
army into Italy. His opponent was the duke of Alva, whom 
Philip appointed governor of Naples. 

It was the irony of fate which involved Philip II. and Alva in a 
war with the head of the church of which they were devoted 
adherents. Alva was completely successful, and might have taken 
Rome, but his reverence for the pope forbade him. This allowed 
Guise to raise new troops in France and Switzerland, with which 
he returned to Italy and attacked Naples. In his straits Philip 
had to secure allies by concessions. Ottavio Farnese of Parma was 
reconciled to Spain by the restoration of Piacenza. Cosimo de 
Medici was allowed to annex Siena and thus to complete the grand 
duchy of Tuscany. But the French were completely unsuccessful. 
The heroic defence of Civitella frustrated all Guise’s attempts to 
take the town. Alva again entered the papal states and advanced 
to the walls of Rome. Paul IV. was at last compelled to treat, 
but the religious devotion of his enemies enabled the defeated 
pope to dictate his own terms. Alva appeared in Rome as a 
suppliant instead of a conqueror, and in his master’s name entreated 
absolution for the offence of defending himself against an un- 
provoked attack. This was the last attempt to shake the Spanish 
supremacy in Italy. 

§ 11. Meanwhile war had also broken out on the French frontier, 
and Philip II. had used his influence over Mary to involve England 
in the war against France. The Spanish army was placed under 
the command of Emmanuel Philibert of Savoy, who had a private 
quarrel with France for the recovery of his paternal duchy. He 
laid siege to St. Quentin, which was defended by the illustrious 
Admiral Coligny. The French commander, Montmorency, advanced 
to his relief, and the pitched battle which ensued ended in the 
complete defeat of the French. Philip himself, who took no part 
in the war, now appeared in the camp, where his caution prevented 
the victory from being followed up. Had the duke of Savoy 
marched at once upon Paris, the capital could hardly have made 
any resistance. But the delay gave the French time; the duke of 
Guise returned from Italy, and in 1558 he gained a brilliant 
- success, no less than the conquest of Calais, the last of the great 
English possessions on French soil. It was to no purpose that the 
count of Egmont won a signal victory over a detachment of the 
French army at Gravelines (July, 1558). Philip was determined 
to make peace, and he was confirmed in this by the death of his 


92 MODERN EUROPE. Cuap. v1. 


wife, and the accession of her sister Elizabeth to the English 
throne. In 1559 the important treaty of Cateau-Cambresis was 
concluded. ‘The chief difficulties which arose were connected with 
Calais and the duchy of Savoy. These were at last compro- 
mised ; Savoy and Piedmont were restored to Emmanuel Philibert, 
the son and heir of the ejected duke Charles, with the exception 
of five fortified places which remained in the hands of the French ; 
_ Calais was ceded to the French king for eight years, but at tke end 
of that period it was to be restored to England under penalty of 
forfeiting 500,000 crowns. ‘The other terms were easily settled. 
The French restored all places which they held in Italy and the 
Low Countries, while the Spaniards evacuated their conquests in 
Picardy. ‘To confirm the peace between the two countries, Philip IT. 
married Henry II.’s daughter Elizabeth, who had previously been 
destined for his son, Don Carlos. The advantage remained on the 
side of Philip, who regained nearly 200 fortresses, while he had to 
surrender only five or six. The treaty was very unpopular in 
France, and the Guises especially declaimed against it as the work 
of Montpensier. 

The peace of Cateau-Cambresis closed the long series of wars 
which had commenced with the accession of Charles Y. to the 
empire in 1519. It marks an epoch in the international relations 
of the European states. France had succeeded in its task of 
resisting the formation of a Hapsburg monarchy which threatened 
the independence of Europe, Germany and Spain are henceforward 
separated. For some time after this religious rather than political 
differences divide Europe; and when something like the old 
rivalry re-commences at the close of the century, it takes the form 
of a national duel between Spain and France. 

For forty years the dominant personality in Europe had been 
Charles V. His disappearance necessarily effected a great change. 
European history loses its unity when it ceases to group itself 
round one central figure. With the great emperor vanished all 
prospect of a compromise between the two rival faiths, Hence- 
forth Roman Catholicism hardens itself in its remaining strongholds, 
and prepares not only to repress all attempts at internal change, 
but also to carry on a determined war against the hostile Protestant 


separatists. 


CHAPTER VII. 
THE COUNTER-REFORMATION, 


§ 1. Protestant doctrines in Italy; their failure to produce a schism; they 
help to reform the Roman Catholic Church. § 2. New religious orders ; 
the Jesuits; causes of their success. § 3. The Inquisition and the 
Index. § 4. The Council of Trent; its three sessions ; general result 
of the Council. § 5. Altered character of the Popes; Pius V.; 
Gregory XIII. ; Sixtus V.; his domestic administration, 


§ 1. Tur Reformation is usually regarded as amovement which was 
confined to the northern nations of Europe. But it also exercised 
a considerable influence in Italy, the stronghold of the papsl power. 
The Italian Renaissance had produced among its pupils a nega- 
tive and somewhat contemptuous attitude towards religion, and 
this was confirmed by continual contact with the most flagrant 
ecclesiastical abuses. But there were not wanting earnest-miuded 
men who were anxious to remove rather than to satire these abuses, 
and who were actuated by the true spirit of the Reformation. It 
has been conclusively shown that Luther’s special doctrine, that of 
justification by faith, found numerous adherents in Italy. It was 
held by Contarini, Sadolet, Bembo and other cardinals of the church. 
It was preached in Naples by Juan Valdez, a Spaniard, in Siena by 
Bernardino Ochino, andin Lucca by Peter Martyr. Ananonymous 
work, “ Of the Benefits of Christ’s Death,” which maintained this 
doctrine, was published in 1540 and obtained a very large circulation. 
As compared with this doctrinal agreement, practical reforms were 
far simpler and were urged with greater unanimity. 

The natural impulse of these reforming tendencies was to bring 
about some compromise with Protestantism and so to preserve. 
the unity of the church. ‘his, as has been seen, was attempted 
at the diet of Ratisbon in 1541, where the pope was represented 
by cardinal Contarini. But several causes combined to frustrate 
the attempt. The desire for reform was confined to the cultivated 
classes in Italy, and found little adherence among the people. ‘The 
traditional policy of the papacy was opposed to any concessions 
which might strengthen its old rival, the erapire. And the influence 


94. MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. vu. 


of the French king was employed to prevent a reconciliation 
between Charles V. and the German Protestants. The prospect 
of a compromise thus proved hopeless, and the reforming tendencies 
took another direction. An attempt was made to purify, and so 
to strengthen the Roman Catholic Church, that it might be able to 
confront its Protestant enemies on an equal footing. It is this 
movement which has received the name of the Counter-Reformation. 

§ 2. The spirit of the movement is manifested in the numerous 
orders which were formed in the 16th century to renew that purity 
and self-sacrifice which had once characterised the older orders, but 
had been lost in their degradation. Such were the Theatines, founded 
in Rome by Caraffa, and the Barnabites, a Lombard order in Milan. 
But by far the most active and important of these new associations 
was that of the Jesuits. Their founder was Ignatius Loyola, a 
Spanish knight, born inthe year 1491. At the siege of Pampeluna 
in 1521 he was crippled by a cannon shot. During the forced 
inaction of his illness he read the legends of the saints, which 
exerted a marvellous influence on his excitable and visionary nature. 
He determined to emulate their achievements, and to resign his 
dreams of military glory for the more heroic service of the Virgin. 
After numerous pilgrimages he took up his abode in Paris, and 
there in middle age set to work to complete his neglected education. 
Among his fellow students he found and gained over the men who 
were to-assist him in his great task. These were Francis Xavier, Iago 
Lainez, Salmeron and Bobadilla, all Spaniards, and Peter Faber, 
a Savoyard. In 1534 these enthusiasts bound themselves by an 


oath to sever themselves from the world and to devote their lives. 


to the service of the church. ‘Two years later they appeared in 
Rome, and after many rebuffs and difficulties they obtained from 
pope Paul III. the bull which constituted them “The Order of 
Jesus.” (27th Sept. 1540.) To their three vows of chastity 
poverty and obedience they added an oath to carry out the com- 
mands of the pope without hesitation or delay. Thus the papacy, 
‘at a time when Europe seemed to be slipping from its grasp, re- 
ceived the voluntary assistance of a body of devoted men, who were 
destined to revive its power and influence. ‘The order obtained the 
right to elect their own general, and their choice fell at once upon 
their founder. On Loyola’s death in 1556, he was succeeded by 
Lainez, a man of far less mystical enthusiasm, but endowed with 
greater administrative ability. To him the order owes the con- 
stitution which has made it the wonder and the model of later 
associations. 

The secret of the success of the Jesuits lay in their complete 
severance from all ordinary ties, from home, family and friendship, 


{ 


A.D. 1534-1542. FOUNDATION OF THE JESUITS. 95 


and their entire devotion to the interests of their order. Obedience 
was the cardinal duty which swallowed up all other motives. 
They renounced, on taking the vows, all right of private judgment, 
and blindly submitted themselves to the orders of their superiors, 
‘The order was divided into grades of varying authority, but the 
whole formed one vast machine which was wielded at will by the 
general. To enable the Jesuits to devote themselves to their 
special work, they were relieved from the ordinary duties of 
monastic orders. ‘Thus they were not bound to the performance of 
the routine religious exercises of each day. Paul IV. wished to 
Withdraw this privilege, but Lainez refused to submit, and the 
danger was removed by the pope’s death. From the first the 
Jesuits occupied a unique position among religious associations. 
They aroused none of the prejudices which had now grown up 
against monks, and they could appeal to a wider circle of sym- 
pathies. To ordinary men’and women they appeared as men of 
the world rather than ecclesiastics. Nothing was too high or too 
low for them. Politics occupied great part of their attention, and 
here they conspicuously displayed that subordination of the means 
to the end which has since been a ground of accusation against 
them. But for a time they were very successful, and became 
influential advisers of kings and ministers. They also exercised 
great influence through the confessional, that most potent instru- 
ment of the Roman Catholic priesthood. But their power was 
made durable not so much by their activity.as preachers and 
confessors, nor even by the political doctrines which they skilfully 
varied to suit different countries and peoples, as by their devotion 
to education. ‘The Jesuit schools became the best in Europe. 
The thoroughness of the system which they formulated, and the 
fact that they taught gratis, enabled them to supersede the humanist 
teachers, who had hitherto claimed a monopoly of learning and 
enlightenment. By gaining over the youth of Catholic countries, 
they secured their hold over future generations. The papacy owed 
a great debt to the order of Loyola, which carried on a crusade against 
Protestantism with the military devotion and enthusiasm that 
characterised its founder. 

§ 5. The Counter-Reformation was compelled, by the instinct of 
self-preservation, to suppress the reforming tendencies in Italy to_ 
which it owed its origin. In 1542 Paul III., the very pope who had 
shown the greatest inclination to reform, established the Inquisition 
in Rome on the Spanish model. The bull appointed six cardinals, 
of whom Caraffa was the most prominent, and empowered them to 
try all matters of faith and to inflict the penalties of death and 
confiscation upon heretics. These powers were exercised with 

\ 


96 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. VII 


unflinching severity. ‘The most conspicuous reformers, as Bernar- 
dino Ochino and Peter Martyr, left Italy. Not content with 
persecuting the professors of heretical doctrines, it was determined 
to suppress the books in which those doctrines were maintained. 
The first Index, or list of proscribed writings, was published in 
Rome by Paul LV., who, as cardinal Caraffa, had been the guiding 
spirit of the Inquisition. A regular book-police was instituted, and, 
supported by the secular authorities, its work was carried out with 
marvellous efficiency. 

§ 4. There was one demand of the reforming party which could not 
be wholly refused, but which produced in the end very unexpected 
results. This was the summons of a general council. ‘The pope 
hesitated for a long time to comply with this request, though it 
was advanced even by Catholic princes. At last, ‘at the urgent 
instance of Cnarles V., Paul III. summoned a council to meet in Trent 
at the end of 1545. ‘The first session was short, and was deprived 
of importance by a quarrel between the emperor and the pope. 
Charles V. wished the council to make such reforms in the church 
as would enable him to come to terms with the German Protes- 
tants. ‘The pope’s object, on the other hand, was to strengthen his 
own authority and to condemn all doctrinal heresy. Charles’ 
successes in Germany terrified Paul III. for his own independence, 
and in 1547 he suddenly transferred the council to Bologna. The 
emperor, deeply indignant at this, protested that its decrees would 
now be null and void, and the council separated without having 
effected any important result. Faul III1.’s successor, Julius III. 
(1550-1555), was an adherent of the emperor, and was induced to 
convene the council again at ‘Trent in 1551. But the pope’s views 
were still opposed to any of the concessions which were desired by 
Charles. The Protestants, who appeared at Trent, were treated as 
recusant heretics, with whom there could be no equal negotiation. 
All doctrinal points which came up for discussion, such as tran- 
_ substantiation, were settled in accordance with the strictly orthodox 
views. But before any progress had been made in this direction, 
the advance of Maurice of Saxony led to the sudden breaking up of 
the council in 1552. | 

Paul IV. (1555-1559) was the representative pope of the counter- 
reformation. It was he who had organised the Inquisition, and 
who drew up the Index. At first his hatred of the Hapsburgs 
diverted his attention to political affairs, and led him to confer 
great powers on his nephews. But on the termination of the war 
he altered his policy, devoted himself to establish the strictest 
ecclesiastical discipline, and drove all his relatives from the court. 
From this time nepotism, in the sense of the advancement of 


om 


A.D. 1545-1562. THE COUNCIL OF TRENT. 97 


relatives to political power, came to an end. '‘I’his had been the 
most flagrant vice of the papacy, and had done much to bring it 
into discredit. Its removal was an important step towards the 
regeneration of the Romish church. : 

Under Paul LV. the demand for a general council had again been 
raised. His successor, Pius IV. (1559-1565), gave his consent, and 
the third, and far the most important, session of the Council of Trent 
was opened in January, 1562. ‘This session differed from the others 
mainly in the fact that there was no longer any idea of a recon- 
ciliation with the Protestants, whose position in Germany had been 
secured by the treaty of Augsburg. ‘The work of the council was 
therefore limited to the narrow circle of the Catholic nations. 
Within these limits it had important duties—to determine the 
relations between the head and the members of the church, to settle 
doctrinal points which were still disputed, and to complete those 
internal reforms which were needed to restore the old reverence for 
the church. 

It was soon evident that even among the Catholics there were 
grave divergences of opinion, and in especial the papal authority 
was exposed to attack. The Germans, acting under instructions 
from Ferdinand I., demanded radicai reforms, such as the marriage 
of the clergy, the communion in both kinds, and services in the 
German language. ‘The French prelates, headed by the Cardinal of 
Lorraine, not only supported the German demands, but took up 
the doctrine advanced in the last century at Constance and Basel of 
the superiority of a general council over the pope. The Spaniards, 
while they were opposed to all doctrinal reforms, wished the 
episcopal authority to be recognised as of divine origin, and thus 
independent of the papacy. All were opposed to the claim 
advanced by the papal legates to have the sole right of bringing 
proposals before the council. It was fortunate for the papacy that 
votes were no longer taken by nations as at Constance. ‘lhe 
Italians still outnumbered the representatives of all other nations, 
and their interests, which were more powerful than their con- 
sciences, were on the papal side. But Pius IV. felt he was 
threatened by the dangers which his predecessors had always 
dreaded from a general council. From these he was saved partly 
by his own ingenuity, but still more by the dexterous diplomacy of 
Cardinal Morone, whom he appointed president of the council. 
The differences between the various nations were carefully fomented 
and points of concord obscured. Separate negotiations were opened 
with the temporal princes, and they were persuaded that the papal 
authority was needed to repress the growth of an independent 
hierarchy. ei the same time it was hinted to the bishops that a 

6 


XN 


98 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. VII. 


strong papacy was their only security against complete subjection to 
the temporal power. 

The triumph of the papacy being thus assured, the work of the 
council proceeded with marvellous rapidity. The pope was anxious 
to bring it to a close, and he met with little or no opposition. In 
the latter half of the year 1563 a decision was come to on all 
important dogmatic points, indulgences, purgatory, the ordination 
of the clergy, the sacrament of marriage, and the worship of saints. 
And almost all were decided in the old Roman Catholic sense. The 
foremost spokesman of the strictly orthodox party was Lainez, the 
general of the Jesuits, Differences were avoided by dexterous 
verbal compron.ises, which meant nothing, as the interpretation of 
the decrees was vested in the pope. Reforms were made in the 
direction of enforcing strict discipline over the inferior clergy, the 
establishment of schools, and a new regulation of parishes. But 
no further mention was made of reforming the central authority, 
the papacy, the cardinals, and the curia, So far from maintaining 
its supremacy over the pope, the council itself petitioned Pius LV. 
to confirm its decrees. On the 4th of December, 1563, the last 
sitting came to an end. 

The Council of Trent was the last of the great ecclesiastical 
assemblies which are so prominent in mediaeval history. It had 
no successor till the meeting of the Vatican Council in 1869. Its 
importance lies in the fact that it completed the counter-Reforma- 
tion. In opposition to the Protestant revolt, it formulated the old 
doctrines with logical distinctness. The traditions which had 
hitherto been open to question were henceforth established 
dogmas. The Catholic church had to content itself with narrower 
limits, but within those limits it acquired new strength and 
consistency. While many of the worst abuses were removed or 
concealed, the old hierarchical constitution, and, above all, the 
despotic authority of the papacy, received a new confirmation. 
These were the advantages which the Roman Catholic church 
reaped from the Reformation, advantages which almost compensated 
it for the loss of territory. 

§ 5. From this time a new spirit seems to take possession of the 
Romish church. It is manifest in the revival of saintly purity of 
life and missionary zeal, which we can, trace in the lives of such 


men as Carlo Borromeo, archbishop of Milan, and St. Francis de ° 


Sales, the heroes of modern Catholicism. But it is even more 
manifest in the altered character of the popes. The age of 
Sixtus [V., Alexander VI.,-and even of Paul III., is past. Their 
place is filled by popes like Pius V. and Sixtus V., who within the 
church are active reformers, while outside they appear as the 


A.D. 1563-1590. POPES OF THE XVL CENTURY. 99 


uncompromising opponents of Protestantism. When they are 
diverted from ecclesiastical interests and duties, it is not by dreams 
of secular aggrandisement for themselves or their families, but by 
the carrying out of long-needed reforms in the States of the 
Church. 

Pius V. (1566-1572) was chosen as the representative of the 
rigid party in the church. Carlo Borromeo was active in sup- 
porting his election. Nor did he disappoint the expectations that 
had been formed of him. He puta final end to nepotism by a law 
which forbade the alienation of any property of the church, and 
threatened excommunication against any one who should propose it. 
He maintained church discipline with the greatest rigour. ‘l'Le 
expenses of the papal household were reduced by the strictest 
economy. In Kurope the influence of so energetic and self-denying 
a pope became a power. Pius V. urged Philip II. to take the 
severest measures against the Netherlands, and approved the 
cruelties of Alva. He sent Italian troops to the aid of the Catholic 
party in France, and gave them special injunctions to grant no 
quarter to Huguenots. He issued the bull of excommunication 
against Elizabeth, which for ever alienated England from the 
papacy. More creditable to the pope was his activity against the 
Turks. He succeeded in concluding the league between Spain and 
Venice, which under the command of Don John of Austria gained 
the great victory of Lepanto in 1571. 

The pontificate of Gregory XIII. (1572-1585) is notable mainly 
as showing that a pope who was personally inclined to laxity was 
unable to resist the prevailing tendency of the age. He was forced 
almost against his will to govern in the same spirit as his pre- 
decessor. He is remembered chiefly as the pope who reformed the 
calendar, and celebrated the massacre of St. Bartholomew. His 
domestic government of the papal states gave rise to disorders 
which it required all the ability of his successor to suppress. 

Sixtus V. (1585-1590) is perhaps the most remarkable pope of 
the 16th century. He was endowed with signal administrative 
ability, and his short pontificate was a period of great and multi- 
farious activity. He limited the number of cardinals to seventy, 
and gave them a new organisation. But bis attention was mainly 
directed to the temporal interests of his subjects. He encouraged 
agriculture and manufactures, and conducted works of great public 
utility. The towns received from him important privileges. The 
city of Rome owed much to Sixtus V. He constructed a colossal 
aqueduct (Acqua Felice) to supply the city with water. The 
erection of the great obelisk in front of St. Peter’s, the triumph of 
the mechanical art of those days, was his work. His object was 


100 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. VII. 


characteristic of the man and the age, the public humiliation of 
pagan monuments before the glory of the cross. The great blot 
upon his administration was his greed for money. ‘lo gratify this 
he resorted to the most ruinous financial expedients. He not only 
sold offices, but created new offices for sale. He raised loans 
recklessly, and secured the interest upon increased taxes, which 
obstructed the industries he was trying to foster. But he was so 
successful in his immediate object that he was able to collect 
nearly five millions of scudi in the castle of St. Angelo. To 
Kurope generally Sixtus V. appeared as the promulgator of the 
most chimerical schemes. ‘The annihilation of the Turkish empire, 
the conquest of Egypt, and the recovery of Jerusalem and the Holy 
Sepulchre, seemed to him quite feasible. Lut behind these dreams 
of a vivid imagination is manifest the spirit of revived Catholicism, 
of which the pope was at once the creature and the representative. 


CHAPTER VIII. 


THE REIGN OF PHILIP II., AND THE REVOLT OF THE 
NETHERLANDS. 


§ 1. Policy of Philip II.; personal character. § 2. Suppression of the 
liberties of Aragon; use of the Inquisition as a political instrument. 
§ 3. History of Don Carlos; his death. § 4. Annexation of Portugal 
to Spain. §5. The Netherlands; causes of discontent; the new 
bishoprics. § 6. The leading nobles, Orange, Egmont and Horn; oppo- 
sition to Granvella, who is recalled. § 7. Egmont’s mission to Spain ; 
the Compromise; the Beggars; iconoclastic riots. § 8. Margaret of 
Parma superseded by Alva; the Council of Blood; beginning of the 
revolt. § 9, Execution of Egmont and Horn; Alva’s cruelty; his 
financial measures ; revolt of the northern provinces; recall of Alva; 
§ 10. Administration of Requesens; the Spanish Fury ; Pacific&tion of 
Ghent. §11. Don John of Austria in the Netherlands; #he Perpetual 
‘Edict; death of Don John. § 12. Alexander Farnese; Union of 
Utrecht ; Francis of Anjou; assassination of William of Orange. § 13. 
The southern provinces return to their allegiance to Spain; the 
northern provinces extort the recognition of their indepeydence. 


§ 1. Tur Counter Reformation found among tempofal princes one 
consistent and active supporter, Philip If., the son and successor 
of Charles V. Austria and the Empire passed to the younger branch 
of the Hapsburgs, but Philip was careful to maintain close relations 
with his German cousins. He himself inherited Spain, the Nether- 
lands, Milan, Naples, the New World and .as number of smaller 
dependencies. Both his territories, and the revenues derived from 
them, made him the mest powerful of European princes. The 
Spanish army was at the heizht of its unrivalled reputation. After 
concluding the treaty of Cateau-Cambresis (1559) Philip returned 
to Spain, which he never again quitted. He transferred the capital 
from Saragossa to Madrid, near which he built a new royal residence, 
the Escorial. From this centre he directed the policy by which he 
hoped to realise his father’s great scheme, the establishment of the 
Hapsburg supremacy in Europe. ‘The means which he employed 
were of course different, as circumstances had changed. In one point, 
in his relations to the church, this difference is most conspicuous, 
Charles V. had subordinated religion to politics, he had no en- 


. 


102 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP, VIII. 


thusiasm for orthodoxy either in doctrine or ceremonial; he was 
anxious to dictate his own terms to the pope, and to make himself 
supreme both in church and in state. Philip 11., on the other hand, 
was the willing vassal of the papacy. ‘The extension of his power 
implied the extension of Roman Catholic doctrines and organisation. 
He was the champion of the reaction. To Charles V. heresy was 
distasteful only as connected with political opposition ; to Philip 
it was something hateful in itself. He expressed his inmost feelings 
when he declared that it was better not to rule at all than to rule 
over heretics. ‘The two guiding motives of his policy were re- 
ligious bigotry and dynastic ambition, and in his mind they were 
inseparable. ; 

In personal character, Philip presents a complete contrast to his 
father. From his youth the latter had been brought into close 
contact with men and affairs. His ductile nature had been open 
to the varied influences of his eventful career. He had learnt to 
conciliate the different nations over which he ruled by conforming 
to their manners and customs. ‘Thus among Flemings, Italians, 
and Spaniards he acquired a personal popularity which often stood 
him in good stead. [ven among the Germans, with whom he had 
least sympathy, it was his policy rather than his person which 
aroused dislike. He took an interest in art and literature; shared 
in the tournaments and other entertainments of the time; and 
collected round him a splendid and imposing court. For such 
behaviour Philip had neither the talent nor the inclination. He 
always remained a Spaniard, and a foreigner to his other subjects. 
He could express himself with ease in no language except Spanish. 
Literature and art had no attractions for him. He carefully 
cultivated the haughty and reserved manner which has been 
always attributed to the grandees of Spain, and which he regarded 
as alone suited to a ruler of men. Hven when he endeavoured in 
his own interests to obtain popularity, as in England, he could 
‘not succeed. Charles V. brought him to Germany to secure his 
succession to the empire, but his presence destroyed what prospect 
there was of such an event.. When he became an independent 
king, Philip carefully secluded himself as much as possible from 
contact with mankind. Even his own ministers could rarely obtain 
an interview with him. The information which he required was 
furnished in writing. He was the most industrious of monarchs, 
but his industry was that of a clerk rather than of a statesman. 
In his cabinet he received and read all despatches, which he 
annotated and even answered with his own hand. He was ac- 
quainted with all the most trivial details of the administration. 
He collected round him ministers of opposite views, such as the 


A.D. 1555-1599. REIGN OF PHILIP IU. 108 


duke of Alva and the prince of Eboli, so that he might decide 
on his own course of action without being biassed by one-sided 
advice. He himself declared that royalty was the most hard- 
worked of offices. His reserve was a source at once of weakness 
and of strength. He had none of the elasticity of purpose and 
variety of resource which a great statesman acquires from personal 
contact with othermen. But at the same time his policy was saved 
from the danger of weak and inconsiderate change; it impressed 
people like a mighty engine which works with constant and resist- 
less force, but whose springs of motion are concealed and mysterious. 

§ 2. In his domestic policy, Philip II. aimed at the complete sup- 
pression of all constitutional privileges and freedom, at the entire 
subjection of Spain to one central power, the monarchy. In this 
he had only to follow the lines already laid down by his father 
and great-grandfather. ‘The Cortes of Castile had been reduced to 
insignificance by Charles V. in 1538. In Aragon, liberties were 
more firmly founded and endured longer. ‘The influence of the 
Cortes was supported by the independence of the Justiza, whose 
authority rivalled that of the crown. In 1590, Antonio Perez, a 
minister who had incurred Philip’s displeasure, appealed for pro- 
tection to the forms of the Aragonese constitution. The king took 
advantage of this to put an end to institutions which checked his 
power. The Cortes became a body of royal nominees with hardly 
any rights but that of presenting petitions. The appointment of 
judicial officers was vested in the crown, and a fortress was erected 
to overawe the old capital, Saragossa. In these and other changes 
Philip was aided by the provincial rivalry which still subsisted. 
Castile and Aragon, though united under one crown, had not for- 
gotten the time when they were independent kingdoms; and only 
became conscious of their common interests when it was too late 
to defend them. It was easy for the king to employ the forces 
of one country to suppress the liberties of the other. And in | 
carrying out his policy of centralisation, Philip found a useful 
weapon in that most terrible of ecclesiastical institutions, the 
Inquisition, It was here that the king found a reward for his 
_devotion to the interests of the church. The judges of the In- 
quisition, who were mostly ecclesiastics, were appointed by the king, 
to whom fell the confiscated property. The dreaded tribunal was 
employed to punish political offenders as well as heretics. Its zeal 
for the crown was rewarded by the periodical autos-da-fé of Jews 
and Moriscoes. But Philip’s policy, however successful, was fatal 
to Spain. He crushed the liberties, but with them the life of -the 
country. The most important industrial elements of the population 
were destroyed or driven into exile by religious persecution. 


104 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. vir. 


§ 3. Philip II.’s merciless character was manifested even within the 
limits of his own family. The most tragic incident of his reign 
was the fate of Don Carlos, the son of his first wife, Maria of 
Portugal. The young prince, who was born in 1545, was brought 
up by his aunt Joanna, and saw little of his father. He was 
afterwards sent to the University of Alcala de Henares, where he 
was the fellow-pupil of Don John of Austria and Alexander Farnese. 
There he gave himself up to a life of dissipation, and this further 
alienated his father, who had never shown any affection for him. 
Philip refused all his son’s demands to be admitted to some office 
suited to his rank. At last Don Carlos planned to escape from 
Spain, probably to the Netherlands, and may even have manifested 
some inclination to the Protestantism which was making great 
progress there. This suspicion is sufficient to explain the wrath 
of Philip, who seems also to have accused his son of a design upon 
his life. The prince was seized and placed in close confinement; 
from which he never emerged. It is quite possible that his death 
(July, 1566) was nataral, but a suspicious age was not slow to 
accuse Philip of the murder of his son. ‘Three months afterwards 
Philip’s second wife, Elizabeth of France, also died. She had at 
one time been the destined bride of Don Carlos, but had been after- 
wards married to the father. This fact.and the coincidence of 
their deaths gaye rise to legends of love and jealousy which have 
supplied both Schiller and Alfieri with the subject of a tragedy. 

§ 4. Philip I.’s greatest success was the annexaticn of Portugal, by 
which he completed the unity of the peninsula. This had been a 
favourite object both of Ferdinand and of Charles V., end numerous 
intermarriages had been concluded which might pave the way for 
such a junction. In 1557 the death of John III. gave the 
Portuguese crown to his in‘ant grandson Sebastian. The regency 
fell into the hands of the young king’s uncle, Henry, a cardinal of 
the church and a devoted adherent of the papacy. Under his rule 
the Jesuits became all-powerful in Portugal. When Sebastian 
came of age to govern, the effects of his ecclesiastical training 
became manifest. He refused to marry, and devoted himself to a 
crusade against the Mohammedans in Africa, By them he was 
slain in the battle of Alcacer (1578) and the crown passed to his 
uncle Henry, a weakly priest in his sixty-seventh year, With him 
it was certain that the Portuguese dynasty must expire. Philip 
IL. at once commenced intrigues to establish his claim to the throne. 
His mother Isabella was the eldest sister of John III., and his first 
wife was John’s eldest daughter. The other claimants were 
Antonio Prior of Crato, the natural son of John III’s brother, and 

the duchess of Braganza, daughter of a younger brother. Antonio 


A.D. 1580. PORTUGAL ANNEXED TO SPAIN. 105 


maintained that he was really legitimate, while the duchess opposed 
Philip’s claim on the ground that no foreigner could ascend the 
throne. The succession question was still unsettled when King 
Henry died (Jan. 1580). Philip at once crossed the frontier with 
an army to support his claim. ‘The clergy and chief nobles were 
gained over by his promise to respect the national liberties. ‘The 
people, who hated Spain and the prospect of foreign rule, rallied 
round Antonio, who was crowned at Lisbon. But he had neither 
ability nor military force to maintain his position. Lisbon was 
taken at the first assault, and the pretender fled to France. There 
he was maintained by the European powers who wished to have a 
means of injuring Philip II. at their command, and died there in 
1595. Philip entered the capital in triumph, and_ received 
the crown. His promise was not fulfilled, and the liberties of 
Portugal soon shared the fate of the similar institutions in Spain, 

To secure the permanence of Spanish rule, the power of the 
nobles was diminished and the royal domains increased. But this 
policy defeated its own ends. ‘The alienation of the nobles from 
Spain led to the restoration of Portuguese independence under the 
House of Braganza in the next century. 

§ 5. In Philip’s Italian provinces, Milan, Naples, and Sicily, his 
system of government was introduced with complete success, but in 
the Netherlands it provoked a storm of opposition which wrecked 
the power of Spain. The Netherlands consisted of seventeen 
provinces, each possessed of independent institutions and inhabited 
by populations of differing character. ‘They had become united by 
falling under the rule of the dukes of Burgundy, from whom they 
had passed to the Hapsburgs. But the union under a common 
government had done little or nothing to put an end to provincial 
differences. Under Charles V., himself a Netherlander by birth, 
some advance had been made towards the formation of a central 
government. A supreme court of justice had been founded at - 
Mechlin, and deputies from the various provinces were summoned 
to form the States-General. But Charles had been too cautious to 
make any determined attack upon local privileges, and the Nether- 
lands remained a loose federation. In one point only had he 
shown uncompromising purpose, in his opposition to religious 
reform. An edict of 1550 threatened heretics with the severest> 
penalties, and a board of inquisitors, or as they were euphemistically 
called, “ ecclesiastical judges,” was formed to enforce them. But in 
spite of this severity the Netherlands were quite submissive when 
they were transferred to Philip IJ. in 1555. 

The new ruler soon made himself as hated as his predecessor had 
been loved. His first act was to renew the edict of 1550. When 


106 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP, VII. 


he departed for Spain in 1559, he showed his contempt for the 
feelings and prejudices of his subjects in the appointment of a 
governor. Passing over the claims of the native nobles, he gave 
the post to his half-sister, Margaret of Parma, the pupil of Ignatius 
Loyola and the devoted instrument of Philip’s reactionary policy. 
Her chief minister was Cardinal Granvella, a Burgundian whose 
father had been an influential adviser of Charles V. With him 
were united Barlaymont, a noble, and Viglius, a lawyer. ‘These 
three formed the Consulta, or secret council, and their influence 
rendered powerless the recognised Council of State, in which the 
great nobles had seats. 

This establishment of an anti-national government provoked 
widespread discontent, which found immediate vent in complaints 
against the continued presence of Spanish troops after the king’s 
departure. So threatening was the opposition, that Philip, much 
against his will, was compelled to withdraw the troops. But no 
sooner was this concession made than a new ground of complaint 
was furnished by proposed ecclesiastical changes. At this time 
there were only four bishoprics in the Netherlands, Arras, Cambray, 
Tournay, and Utrecht. Philip obtained a bull from Pius IV, in 
1560, creating fourteen new bishoprics, with three archbishoprics 
at Mechlin, Cambray, and Utrecht. This extension of the hierarchy 
was felt to be a general grievance. The secular estates dreaded the 
great development of the Spanish and ecclesiastical power, while 
even the clergy were discontented by the proposal to confiscate 
church property for the endowment of the new sees. The doctrines 
of Luther and Calvin had already made considerable progress in 
spite of the edicts. They now became a political power. 

§ 6. The lead of the opposition was taken by the great nobles, who 
felt themselves excluded from their due share of the government. At 
their head were three men, William of Orange, Count Egmont, and 
Admiral Horn. Egmont was a soldier who had won great distinc- 
tion in the battles of St. Quentin and Gravelines. His bravery 
and his loyalty were equally conspicuous, but his devotion to the 
interests of the country and the feeling that his great services were 
unrequited combined to place him unwillingly in opposition to the 
crown. He was a sincere Catholic and had no sympathy with the 
reformed doctrine. William of Orange was a man of very different 
stamp and of far greater importance. Ile was the descendant of 
the German house of Nassau, which had acquired large possessions 
in the Netherlands. His grandfather, Engelbert II., had divided 
his territories between his two sons, Henry and William. Henry, 
the elder, who received the lands in the Netherlands, brought the 
principality of Orange into the family by his marriage with the 


A.D. 1559-1565. DISCONTENT IN THE NETHERLANDS. 107 


sister of that Prince of Orange who commanded at the siege of 
Rome in 1527. On the death of his son Réné in 1544, both Orange 
and the territories in the Netherlands fell to the younger branch of 
Nassau, which was now represented by William, the grandson of 
Engelbert. The prince who thus obtained so magnificent an in- 
heritance was at the time only eleven years old, having been born at 
Dillenburg in 1533. He was now taken into the service of Charles 
Y., became a page in the imperial household, and there gave up the 
reformed faith in which he had been brought up. He became a 
favourite with Charles, who employed him on important embassies. 
He was still quite a young man, and little was known of his character 
when the accession of Philip II. called him to play an important 
part in the history of Europe. 

The opposition directed itself in the first place against Granvella, 
who was designed to be archbishop of Mechlin and Primate of the 
Nethelands. The nobles formed a league among themselves, and 
refused to take any share in the conduct of business until the 
minister was removed. At last even the regent herself, who had 
no love for the man whose advice was often preferred to her own, 
joined in the demand for Granvella’s removal. In 1564 Philip 
felt himself reluctantly compelled to accede. The Cardinal was 
requested to withdraw of his own accord for the sake of peace. 
But his conduct had earned rather than forfeited the esteem of his 
master. After a brief residence on his estates at Besancon, he was 
summoned to Madrid, where he remained an influential crown- 
adviser till his death in 1586. 

§ 7. The nobles soon found that they had no reason to regard 
Granvella’s recall as atriumph. Philip was determined to make no 
change in his system of government; the enforced concession only 
increased his obstinacy. He ordered the decrees of the Council of 
Trent to be promulgated in the Netherlands, and enjoined on the 
regent a strict enforcement of the edicts against heresy. His com- 
mands were obeyed, but the persecution only strengthened the move- 
ment it was intended to suppress. The nobles despatched Egmont 
to Madrid in 1565, to represent to the king the evils of the policy 
which he was pursuing. Philip befooled the loyal but vain count 
by the pomp of his reception, and promised increased moderation. 
Egmont returned with the conviction that his mission had been 
altogether successful. But Philip was unmoved ; new and more 
severe edicts were issued: the relentless severity of the persecution 
was increased. Thousands of skilled Flemish workmen were driven 
to take refuge in England, where the politic Elizabeth received them 
with open arms. 

In the midst of the general excitement, a league was formed 


“a 


108 MODERN EUROPE. Onap. vitt. 


against the Inquisition, called the Compromise. Its founders were 
St. Aldegonde, Brederode, and Lewis of Nassau, William’s brother. 
It was joined by 500 of the lesser nobles, and also by a number of 
burghers. It derived additional importance from the fact that 
many of the members were Catholics. ‘The greater nobles, not yet 
prepared for extreme measures, held aloof. A petition to the regent 
was prepared and presented by Brederode at the head of 300 
followers. Barlaymont contemptuously told Margaret not to be 
afraid of those beggars. ‘The nickname was gleefully adopted, and 
the most determined of Philip’s opponents were henceforth known 
as the “ Beggars.” 

While the regent was making vain efforts to satisfy complaints 
and at the same time to obey her brother, the movement of 
opposition spread from the nobles to the lower classes. Everywhere 
the Calvinist preachers collected crowds of armed and enthusiastic 
hearers. Riots broke out, and the images and ornaments in the 
churches were destroyed by the iconoclastic fury of the mob. In 
the face of this general rebellion the edicts could not be carried out. 
The regent wished to escape from Brussels, but was prevented by 
Egmont and Orange, who promised to support her authority if she 
would consent to abolish the Inquisition. She was unable to refuse, 
and they at once set to work to restore order. 

§ 8. But meanwhile the news of the disorders had infuriated 
Philip II, He refused to recognise the concessions which his sister had 
made. He ordered the renewal of the old edicts, and determined to 
send Alva to the Netherlands to carry them out by force of arms. 
William of Orange, who had endeavoured to conciliate Spain by the 
suppression of tumult, was so depressed at the news of this de- 
termination that he retired to his German territories. Alva was 
merely a brutal soldier with no conception of the duties or methods 
of civil government. He found the provinces at peace, and by 
conciliatory. measures might have secured them to Spain. But 
severity had been enjoined by his master, and was also congenial 
to his own nature, His violence excited the bitterest hatred of 
Spanish rule and gave rise to a revolt which developed into 
a struggle for life and death. Margaret of Parma, who found her 
measures reversed and her authority superseded, soon quitted the 
Netherlands. 

Alva’s first act was to arrest Egmont and Horn, though they had 
lately given conspicuous support to the government. His great 
recret was that the prince of Orange had escaped his clutches. 
He erected an extraordinary court of justice, the “Council of 
Disorders,” which the people called the “Council of Blood.” ‘The 
persecution now commenced resembled a massacre rather than a 


~~ 


ee 


ene oT ee 


A.D. 1567-1573. ALVA IN THE NETHERLANDS. 109 


judicial proceeding. ‘The Protestant powers of Europe were 
profoundly moved. Philip II. received a strong remonstrance 
from his cousin Maximilian IL, but disregarded it. In the 
Netherlands the feeling of dismay was even stronger for a time 
than the instinctive desire for resistance. But William of Orange, 
who heard of these events in his castle of Dillenburg, was convinced 
that now or never was the time for him to move. He formally 
announced his adhesion to Calvinism. An army was collected com- 
posed of German mercenaries, French Huguenots, and exiles from 
the Netherlands. One division of this force, under the command 
of Lewis of Nassau, defeated a detachment of Spaniards at Heiliger- 
lee (24th May, 1568). The great revolt of the Netherlands had 
begun. 

§ 9. The news of the defeat decided Alva to conduct the war in 
person. Before leaving Brussels, he had Egmont and Horn tried and 
executed, an event which sent a thrill of horror through Europe. 
He then marched to meet Lewis of Nassau and defeated him at the 
battle of Jemmingen. It was in vain that William of Orange 
advanced in person into Brabant to retrive this loss. Alva refused 
to meet him in battle, and want of money and provisions compelled 
the prince to retreat. With his brother and the remnant of his 
forces William took part in the Huguenot campaign of 1569 in 
France. Alva boasted that the revolt was crushed. <A’ perfect 
reign of terror ensued in the Netherlands, which were treated as a 
conquered country. Not only were the previous cruelties revived 
with still more reckless severity ; Alva also developed a new system 
of taxation, which was to bring vast revenues to the Spanish crown. 
His ignorance of public economy was equal to his ferocity, and 
produced results quite as disastrous. He proposed in March, 1569, 
to impose a tax of a hundredth penny, or one per cent. on all 
property. All sales of real property were taxed at five per cent., 
and of movables at ten per cent. A commercial community, like 
that of the Netherlands, was threatened with complete ruin by such 
impositions. Even Alva’s obstinacy was unable to carry his proposals 
against the opposition of the most devoted adherentsto Spain. One 
commodity after another was excepted from the taxes, which brought 
in little or nothing. Alva’s financial measures proved a failure, and 
they convinced even Philip II. of his representative’s incompetence. 
The brief period of Spanish despotism brought ruin to the industry 
of the Netherlands. Manufactures and commerce began to rass 
over to England. The place of Bruges and Antwerp was taken by 
London. 

Alva’s recall had been decided upon, but he continued to hold 
office till the appointment of a successor. But he remained only to 


110 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. VIII. 


witness the fall of the edifice which he had reared on .a foundation 
of violence and bloodshed. In 1572 the “sea beggars,” exiles who 
had found refuge on the English coast and a means of a subsistence 
in piracy, attacked and captured the town of Brill. This was 
followed by a general revolt of the northern provinces. Lewis of 


Nassau, by a bold movement, made himself master of the fortress of 


Mons (Bergen) in Hainault, in the heart of the Spanish power. 
I’'rom this time all the efforts of Spain could never restore complete 
subjection. On July 18, 1572, the states of Holland, Zealand, Fries- 
land, and Utrecht acknowledged the authority of William of Orange 
as stadtholder. Everything seemed to favour the cause of liberty : 
assistance was confidently expected from France, then under the 
influence of Coligny. But the massacre of St. Bartholomew and 
the change of French policy put an end to this hope, and restored 
the superiority of the Spanish arms. Mons was forced to surrender, 
and Alva’s son Frederick undertook the conquest of the northern 
provinces. Zutphen, Naarden and Haarlem were besieged and 
taken; but at last the heroism of the inhabitants of Alkmaar forced 
the Spaniards to retreat. But meanwhile Alva, conscious of faiiure 
and weary of a war in which success could bring no honour, 
had himself petitioned for a recall. In December, 1573, he left the 
Netherlands, where his name was long remembered with dismay 
ani horror. 

§ 10. Alva’s successor, Don Luis de Requesens, was an able soldier 
and was personally inclined to moderate measures. But he was 
tied down by his instructions from Philip, who was determined not 
to give way. The three demands of William of Orange—the 
withdrawal of Spanish troops, restoration of the old constitution, 
and religious freedom—were rejected, and the war went on. Lewis 
of Nassau, with his brother Henry, were defeated and slain at 
the battle of Mooker Heath (April, 1574). But this disaster was 
redeemed by the relief of Leyden. Besieged by the Spaniards 
for seven months and reduced to the direst necessities, the 
inhabitants still held out till the advance of Orange compelled 
the raising of the siege (October, 1574), The University of Leyden 
was founded, on William’s suggestion, to commemorate this 
heroic incident in the history of the town. The next year was 
occupied with futile negotiations at Breda and military movements 
of slight importance. But the sudden death of Requesens in 
March, 1576, brought with it important changes. 

During the interval that elapsed before the appointment of a new 
governor, the conduct of affairs devolved on the council of state in 
Brussels, The Spanish troops, whose pay was in hopeless arrears, had 
for some time been on the verge of mutiny. They now openly refused 


; 23 Salles Ny eye he 


~ aii ti 


A.D. 1572-1578. DON JOHN OF AUSTRIA. 111 


obedience to a civil government, and seized and plundered a number of 
the most wealthy cities. The sack of Antwerp, which lasted three 
days, during which the inhabitants were treated with the greatest 
barbarity, received the name of the Spanish Fury. These events 
enabled William of Orange to realise his great desire of combining 
the southern «vith the northern provinces in a common cause. 
The conduct of the soldiery brought into prominence the political 
interests which united the provinces, and obscured for a time 
their religious differences. The Pacification of Ghent was signed 
in November, 1576. By this all the provinces, while recognising , 
the authority of Philip, agreed to, expel the foreign soldiers, to 
establish religious toleration, and to convene a federal assembly. 
To conciliate the orthodox states of the south, Holland and 
Zealand, which were now wholly Protestant, were forbidden to 
take any measures against the Roman Catholic religion. 

§ 11. At this critical moment Philip’s half-brother, Don John of 
Austria, the hero of the victory of Lepanto, appeared in Luxemburg 
as successor to Requesens. In the face of the general union it 
was impossible any longer to refuse concessions, and the “ Perpetual 
Edict” confirmed the Pacification of Ghent and promised the 
immediate removal of the Spanish troops (February, 1577). But the 
Prince of Orange distrusted the fair promises of Spain, and 
refused to- accept the edict in Holland and Zealand. Don John, 
hampered by Philip’s commands and impatient of constitutional 
checks,*soon alienated the estates. William appeared in Brussels in 
September, 1577, and the governor was powerless. But though the 
prince was a favourite with the people, he was regarded with 
jealousy by the nobles of the southern provinces, who called in 
‘the Archduke Matthias of Austria. His authority was recognised 
by the States, but he had no real power. Don John took up 
arms to maintain his position, and defeated the hostile troops at 
Gemblours (January, 1578). But Philip II. was jealous of his 
brilliant half-brother, and refused to send supplies of men and 
money. After suffering a reverse near Mechlin, Don John died, 
disgusted with the world, at the early age of thirty-two (1 October, 
1578). His brief career in the Netherlands had one important 
result. By his conciliatory measures, he aimed at the dissolution 
of the Pacification of Ghent, and paved the way for the return 
of the southern provinces to Spanish rule. | 

§ 12. Don John’s successor ‘was his nephew, Alexander Farnese 
duke of Parma, son of the ex-regent Margaret, and the first general 
of his age. He pursued the policy of his predecessor with signal 
success. He made use of the antipathy which the Catholics in 
the south felt towards the intolerant Calvinists in the north. He 


112 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. VII. 


was aided by disorders among William’s foreign troops, who 
oppressed the people they had come to defend. ‘The Prince of 
Orange discovered that it was hopeless to unite all the provinces, 
and that it was impossible to maintain the Pacification of Ghent. 
He was obliged to fall back on the devoted population of the 
north, which was opposed to Spain on religious as well as 
patriotic grounds. In 1579, the seven provinces of Holland, 
Zealand, Utrecht, Guelders, Zutphen, Groningen and Overyssel 
formed the Union of Utrecht, the foundation of the Dutch 
Republic. The authority of Philip was still nominally retained, 
but this was now a meve form. In 1581] the severance from 
Spain was publicly announced, But there was as yet no idea of 
complete independence. ‘The sovereignty was offered to Francis 
of Anjou, who gladly accepted it. But his pride was hurt by 
the continued influence of William of Orange, and he determined 
to establish an independent power by a coup d@état. A number 
of towns were suddenly occupied by his troops. In Antwerp, 
where the duke himself was present, the resistance of the citizens 
led to a massacre which was called the “French Fury.” These 
high-handed proceedings alienated the people, and the duke of 
Anjou was compelled to return to France, where he died the 
next year (1584). The northern provinces now formed an inde- 
pendent constitution under William of Orange, as count of Holland 
and Zealand. Soon afterwards the prince, the great Protestant 
hero.of the century, was assassinated by Balthasar Gerard (10 July, 
1584). This was the last of seven attempts on his life, all 
encouraged by the Spanish king, who had set a price on the 
head of his unconquerable enemy. William’s authority descended 
to his son Maurice, who in military skill soon more than rivalled’ 
his father. 

§ 13. From this time the war ceases to have any but a purely 
military interest. Alexander of Parma succeeded before his death, 
in 1592 in reducing the southern provinces to complete obedience. 
They became the Spanish Netherlands, and in 1495 Philip gave 
them as a dowry to his daughter Isabella on her marriage with 
the archduke Albert of Austria. he northern states preserved 
their independence. This was due, partly to the skill and ability 
of Maurice of Nassau, partly to the assistance of Elizabeth of 
England, but mainly to the fact that Philip II. found more 
than enough to do elsewhere, ‘The war with England and the 
destruction of the Spanish Armada dealt a fearful blow to the 
power of Spain. Then Philip’s connection with the League in- 
volved him in French politics. Twice was the duke of Parma 
compelled to leave the Netherlands at a critical moment and to 


5g 


A.D. 1579-1609. INDEPENDENCE OF HOLLAND. 113 


lead his army into France. The accession of Henry 1V. ruined 
the schemes of Philip Il. Even after his death in 1598, it 
was long before Spain would consent to resign its claim to any 
part of the Netherlands. At last, in 1609; Philip III. concluded 
a truce for twelve years which practically secured the independence 
of the seven provinces, and the Dutch Republic obtained formal 
recognition by the treaty of Westphalia in 1648, 
7 


114 MODERN EUROPE. Cuap, 1x. 


CHAPTER IX. 


FRANCK AND THE WARS OF RELIGION, 1559-1610. 


§ 1. Religious persecution in France under Francis J. aud Henry II. § 2. 
~ Catharine de Medici; the Guises ; the houses of Bourbon and Chatillon. 
§ 3. Reign of Francis II. ; power of the Guises ; conspiracy of Amboise ; 
Edict of Romorantin. § 4. Accession of Charles [X.; States-General 
at Orleans ; Catharine de Medici in power; Edict of July, 1561; con- 
ference at Poissy; Edict of January, 1562. § 5. The triumvirate ; 
Antony of Navarre gained over; massacre of Vassy; outbreak of war ; 
battle of Dreux; assassination of Francis of Guise; Edict of Amboise. 
§ 6. Conference of Bayonne; conspiracy of Meaux; second war; 
Montmorency killed; treaty of Longjumeau. § 7. Third war; battles 
of Jarnac and Moncontour; peace of St. Germain. § 8. Changed 
attitude of the French Court; influence of Coligay; his attempted 
assassination; massacre of St. Bartholomew; was it premeditated ? 
§ 9. Rise of the Politiques; Edict of July, 1573; death of Charles IX. 
§ 10. Henry III. adopts a persecuting policy; the Huguenots obtain 
foreign assistance ; States-General at Blois; Edict of Bergerac. § 11. 
Seven years of comparative peace; death of Francis of Anjou makes 
Henry of Navarre heir to the throne; formation of the Catholic 
League; war of the three Henries; battle of Coutras. § 12. Supre- 
macy of Guise; his assassination; Henry III. also assassinated. § 13. 
Question of the succession ; final victory of Henry IV.; termination of 
civil wars. § 14. Edict of Nantes; financial administration of Sully. 
§ 15. General character of Henry IV.’s reign. 


§1. Ir was impossible for France to remain isolated from the general 
movement of religious reform. Lcclesiastical abuses were as rife 
there as elsewhere, especially after the Concordat of 1515 gave the 
Crown the appointment to benefices. ‘The renaissance movement, 
and the contact with other countries produced by the Italian wars, 
led men naturally to criticise the established faith. The writings 
of Luther and other reformers were circulated through France, and 
found earnest readers. Francis I., devoid of religious enthusiasm 
and a patron of literary cuiture, was personally inclined to tolerance. 
But his domestic government depended less on his own will than 
on foreign politics. His rivalry with Charles V. forbade him to 
quarrel with the pope, or to allow the French nation to become 
divided and so weakened. At the instigation of the Sorbonne, the 


+ al 


AD. 1560. CATHARINE DE MEDICI. B15° 
a 


theological fagulty of the Paris University, he issued the most 
severe edicts against heresy. Many reformers were burnt, while 
others sought safety in exile. Henry II. pursued the same policy 
as his father, not so much from necessity as Yrom inclination. Yet, 
in spite of persecution, the reformed doctrines continued to progress. 
The constant warfare in which France was engaged prevented any 
very complete execution of the religious edicts. But in 1559 
Henry II. obtained peace by the treaty of Cateau-Cambresis, and 
prepared to devote himself to the suppression of heresy. At this 
crisis, as he was celebrating the marriage of his daughter with 
Philip I., he received a fatal wound in a tournament. / With his 
death commences the period of religious conflict in France. 

§ 2. To intelligently follow succeeding events it is necessary to have 
a clear conception of the chief personages who became the leaders 
of parties. Henry II. left behind him four sons, three of whom 
succeeded to the crown. But none of them possessed either ability 
or independence, and they are merely puppets in the hands of more 
prominent actors. ‘Their mother, Catharine de Medici, who had 
been married in her early youth, had hitherto taken little or no 
part in politics. Her husband never cared for her, and paid far 
more attention to his mistresses. But Catharine’s ambition was 
only strengthened by its enforced repression, and she eagerly 
grasped at the opportunity of ruling France through her sons. For 
many years she exercised a fatal influence over the kingdom. She 
encouraged her children in frivolity and vice to make them more 
dependent. She employed those stratagems and deceits which 
passed for policy in Italy, and her knowledge of the weaknesses of 
human nature gave her prodigious power. She stopped at no 
crime, however heinous, which might aid in the accomplishment of 
her schemes. 

Even more important for a time than the queen-mother were 
the Guises. Claude of Guise, the second son of Réné of Lorraine, 
had come to seek his fortune at the French court, bringing with 
him six sons. Of these, two obtained great importance. ‘The 
eldest, Francis of Guise, acquired a military reputation as the 
defender of Metz and the conqueror of Calais. His brother Charles 
entered the church and was known as the cardinal of Lorraine. 
He devoted his attention to politics, and became prominent among 
the ministers of Henry II. ‘lhe Guises were firm supporters of the 
Catholic religion, and in close connection with Philip II. and the 
papacy. In opposition to the Guises stood the chief noble families 
of France, headed by the Bourbons. Antony of Bourbon was, 
after Henry’s children, the nearest male heir to the crown. He 
had married Jeanne of Navarre, and under her influence became a 


116 MODERN EUROPE. CHar, Ix. 


convert to Calvinism. But Antony, though a popular and able 
soldier, was weak and irresolute. His younger brother, Louis 
prince of Condé, who was more firm and capable, soon superseded 
Antony as the leader of the Protestant party. With the Bourbons 
were closely allied the three Chatillons, the nephews of the constable 
Montmorency. The eldest, Odet de Chatillon, though a cardinal, 
was suspected of an inclination to reform. The second brother, 
Gaspar, was the celebrated Admiral de Coligny, the heroic and 
disinterested champion of the Huguenots. The third brother, 
Francis d’Andelot, was an able supporter of Coligny. Montmorency 
himself opposed the supremacy of the Guises, but remained devoted 
to the old faith. 

§ 3. The accession of Francis II., who was legally of age though 
really a minor, gave none of the anticipated power to his mother. 
He fell altogether into the hands of the Guises, the uncles of his 
wife, Mary Stuart. ‘The reins of government were assumed by the 
cardinal of Lorraine, while his brother, the duke of Guise, had 
control over the army. ‘Their object was to establish Mary Stuart 
on the English throne in place of Elizabeth, who was held 
to be illegitimate. In this enterprise they relied on the support of 
the papacy, and were therefore anxious to suppress all tendencies 
to heresy in France. Numerous edicts were issued and enforced 
against the Huguenots, as the Calvinists were called in contempt. 

But. the Guises had to confront a powerful opposition. French 
finances were in a very serious condition, and the blame for this fell 
on the cardinal, who had managed them under Henry II. The 
heavy taxation and the ill-success of the war in Scotland alienated 
the people. But far more serious was the hostility of the nobles, 
who hated the Guises as foreigners, and who regarded the nobles of 
royal blood as the rightful holders of political power. Opposition 
to the Guises inclined the nobles to the reformed religion, and it 
was this which gave the Huguenot movement its political and 
aristocratic character. In the midst of the general discontent a 
certain La Renaudie concerted a plot to seize the person of the king 
at Amboise. The enterprise, though condemned by Calvin, is said 
to have been encouraged by the prince of Condé. It proved a 
complete failure. a Renaudie was slain and most of his followers 
executed. . 

The conspiracy of Amboise, though unsuccessful, terrified the 
cardinal into moderation. ‘The chancellorship was given to Michel 
L’Hopital, the representative of a small party which tried to hold 
the balance between the two extremes. The Edict of Romorantin, 
while forbidding public worship to the Huguenots, conceded liberty 
of conscience. ‘The States-General were summoned to meet at 


A.D. 1560—1562. THE GUISES. - 14.7 


Orleans. But in spite of this apparent change the Guises held to 
their policy. ‘They used every exertion to secure a majority in the 
States, and they imprisoned Condé on a charge of complicity in the 
recent conspiracy. He was even tried and condemned to death. 
But their schemes were all foiled by the sudden death of Francis II. 
(5 Dec., 1560). 

§ 4. The accession of her second son, Charles IX., at the age of 
eleven, gave Catharine de Medici her desired opportunity. By 
prompt action she secured the regency, and bought off the undeni- 
able claims of Antony of Bourbon. The Guises, disappointed of their 
own hopes, supported her government as preferable to that of the 
Bourbons. Montmorency returned to Paris. Catharine conceived™ 
the policy of balancing parties against each other, and thus securing 
her own power. In this she relied on the assistance of the Chan- 
cellor L’Hopital. But all her efforts were unable to prevent an 
open conflict. 

The States-General, summoned to Orleans under Francis II., met 
after his death. The nobles and the third estate complained bitterly 
of the condition of the church, and demanded radical reforms. ‘The 
clergy, on the other hand, urged the persecution of heretics. No- 
thing was done immediately, but the Edict of July, 1561, relaxed 
the previous severity by substituting exile for death as the punish- 
ment of avowed heresy. A meeting of deputies of the estates was 
held in August at Poissy, where a religious conference took place. 
The demands of the laity went far beyond those made at Orleans. 
They included a complete constitutional reform of both church and 
state, and the confiscation of two-thirds of the clerical property for 
secular uses. But the clergy, by paying a large sum of ready 
money, were able to purchase the protection cf the government, 
and the conference on doctrinal points came to nothing. The Edict 
of January, 1562, gave a wide extension to the religious toleration 
which L’Hépital desired. Huguenot worship was allowed in the 
families of nobles, in the open country and in unwalled. towns. It 
was only with great difficulty that the orthodox Parliament of Paris 
was induced to register the edict. 

§ 5. It gave the greatest offence to the Catholics. A league had 
already been formed for the protection of the established religion 
by Montmorency, the duke of Guise, and marshal St. André, which 
was designated by their enemies as the ‘‘ triumvirate.” They 
conceived the happy idea of gaining over Antony of Navarre. 
Hopes were held out to him by the pope that Philip II. would give 
him the island of Sardinia or a kingdom in Africa. The weak 
prince allowed himself to be duped, and he deserted the. Huguenots 
to become a member of the league. Thus strengthened, the Catholics 


118 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP, IX. 


prepared for violent measures. The duke of Guise, on his way to 
Paris, found a Huguenot congregation worshipping in a barn at 
Vassy. His followers were sent to disperse them, and a riot ensued, 
in which sixty unarmed men, women, and children were slain, and 
more than two hundred were wounded. In Paris the duke was 
received by the mob as a conqueror. The regent and her son were 
compelled against their will to leave Fontainebleau for the capital. 

Meanwhile the news of the massacre of Vassy had produced a 
profound impression in the Protestant world. The Huguenot nobles 
assembled at Orleans at the summons of Condé. ‘They received 
assistance from the German princes, who regarded them as supporters 
of an imprisoned king, and from Elizabeth of England, who hated 
the Guises as the allies of Mary Stuart, and who received Havre in 
return for her support. The Catholics, on their side, obtained 
troops fiom Philip I. and from the unreformed Swiss Cantons, 
together with supplies of money from the pope. The Huguenot 
army marched to Normandy, where the war broke out. At the 
siege of Rouen, Antony of Navarre was slain. The headship of the 
house of Bourbon now devolved upon his son, afterwards Henry 
IV., who was at present only ten years old. The death of his elder 
brother gave increased influence to Condé. ‘The two armies finally 
met in a pitched battle at Dreux. Both sides claimed the victory, 
but both had suffered great loss. St. André was slain, while Condé 
on the one side and Montmorency on the other were taken prisoners, 
The command of the Huguenots was assumed by Coligny, who 
conducted a skilful retreat to the Loire. ‘The duke of Guise 
advanced to besiege Orleans, the headquarters of his enemies, but 
was assassinated by a fanatical Calvinist of the name of Poltrot 
(18th February, 1563). His death put an end to the war. The 
Peace of Amboise was arranged by the two prisoners, Condé and 
Montmorency. By this the reformed faith was tolerated in all 
those places where it was established before the war, though 
Catharine de Medici insisted that Paris should be excepted from 
this. Moreover in each official district a town was selected which 
was specially devoted to the celebration of the Huguenot worship. 
The nobles retained the privileges secured to them by the edict of 
January. ‘The goverament now turned its arms against the 
English, who were compelled to surrender Havre. 

§ 6. The death of the great party leaders and the exhaustion of the 
combatauts gave new strength to Catharine’s government, and this 
was increased by the recovery of Havre. She had Charles IX. 
formally proclaimed of age, though all authority was still left in her 
own hands. She now set herself to maintain peace and to strengthen 
the central power. At a conference at Bayonne with her.daughter 


A.D. 1562-1568. RELIGIOUS WARS. 119 


the queen of Spain, the duke of Alva in vain urged her to employ 
violent measures against the Huguenots. Catharine had all a 
woman’s horror of war, and an Italian’s preference for guileful 
diplomacy. While she enforced the treaty of Amboise, she lost 
none of her attachment to the Roman Catholic faith. On a joutney 
through France the sight of the fallen crucifixes grieved her. ‘She 
was quite willing to suppress heresy, if it could only be done 
without disturbing the peace. She therefore continued to favour 
L’H6pital, and refused to accept the decrees of the Council of 
'l'rent. 

But in so disttgbed a period as the sixteenth century, events 
were often too strong for the most cautious of politicians. - Alva’s 
violent policy in the Netherlands excited new hopes among the 
Catholics and new fears among the Huguenots. The latter dreaded 
lest the power of Spain should be re-established in the neighbouring 
provinces and then employed to restore Catholicism in France. 
They had no confidence in the moderation of the queen-mother 
and felt that their safety depended on their own exertions. A con- 
spiracy was formed in 1567 with the greatest secrecy. Its object 
was to obtain possession of the king’s person at Meaux, and to 
compel the dismissal of the Swiss troops and a change of govern- 
ment. Everything was carefully prepared, and success assured, 
when Condé allowed himself to be entrapped into futile negotiations. 
The delay gave time to collect the Swiss, and under their protection 
the court was removed to Paris. Condé now laid siege to the 
capital, and demanded not only toleration for the Huguenots but also 
free admission to public offices. But Catharine had been driven into 
the arms of the Catholics, and his demands were refused. The 
Parisians strained every nerve to support the government and the 
orthodox cause. A large army was collected under the command 
. of the aged Montmorency. At St. Denis another indecisive battle 
took place, in which Montmorency received a mortal wound. The 
office of Constable was not revived, and the command of the troops 
was given to Charles IX.’s younger brother, Henry of Anjou. 
Philip II. offered assistance to Catharine, but she refused to subject 
France to the humiliation of foreign interference. In March, 1568, 
this war was closea by the treaty of Longjumeau, which confirmed 
the previous treaty of Amboise. 

§ 7. There was never any intention of observing this treaty, which 
was concluded only to disarm the Huguenots. The conspiracy of 
Meaux convinced Catharine that continued toleration would be fatal 
to the royal power. She threw in her lot with the Catholic powers, 
who in 1568 were making vigorous efforts to suppress heresy. The 
cardinal of Lorraine regained his position in the council and 


120 MODERN EUROPE. Cuap. Ix. 


L’Hoépital was dismissed from the chancellorship. The fanatical 
pope Pius V. released the French government from its obligations. 
A royal edict forbade the celebration of the reformed service under 
penalty of death, and ordered the Huguenot preachers to leave the . 
kingdom within fourteen days. An attempt was made to seize 
Condé and Coligny, and only with great difficulty could they escape 
to La Rochelle. This port became the head-quarters of the 
Huguenots, and enabled them to keep up their connection with 
England andthe Netherlands. Hither came Condé’s sister-in-law 
Jeanne, with her young son, Henry of Navarre. 

Before the end of 1568 the third religious wag had broken out in 
France. It is impossible here to follow the military movements. 
In the open field the Catholics under Henry of Anjou were con- 
stantly successful. In the battle of Jarnac (13 March, 1569) the 
Huguenots were routed and Condé slain. He was succeeded in the 
command by Coligny, who never displayed more conspicuous 
courage and conduct. But want of money to pay his troops 
compelled him to risk a battle against superior forces, and at 
Moncontour (3 October, 1569) he was again defeated. Had the 
Catholics promptly followed up the victory they might have 
crushed the Huguenots. But the government was beginning to 
vacillate. Catharine de Medici had no sympathy with the ambitious 
schemes of Philip II., who wished to use France as a tool. And 
Charles LX. was jealous of the military successes of his younger 
brother, the duke of Anjou, who was the favourite of his mother and 
the Catholic party. ‘lhe influence of the Guises, who were hand 
and glove with Philip II., declined. In August, 1570, the treaty of 
St. Germain put an end to hostilities. Religions freedom and the 
right of public service were confirmed to the Huguenots, and they 
received four towns as places of refuge, La Rochelle, Montauban, 
Cognac and La Charité. . 

§ 8. This treaty was followed by a great change in the attitude of 
the French court. Charles IX. showed an unexpected determination 
to assume the reins of government. He wished to free France from 
foreign influence, and to emulate the achievements of his father 
and grandfather. ‘The connection with Spain was broken off, and 
negotiations were opened with England and the Netherlands. It 
was proposed that Elizabeth should marry the duke of Anjou, and, 
after that was given up, the duke of Alengon. Lewis of Nassau‘ 
the brother of William the Silent, was well received at court. In 
domestic politics Charles broke with the Guises and allied himself 
with the moderate party. His youngest sister, Margaret, was 
betrothed to the young Henry of Navarre. Coligny was invited to 
court, and there soon obtained great influence over the weak and 


a 


A.D. 1568-1572. MASSACRE OF ST. BARTHOLOMEW. 121 


impulsive king. He urged an immediate war against Spain, and 
Charles 1X. accepted the plan. 

But before this could be carried out, Catharine de Medici hurried 
back to Paris, determined to employ any means in her power to 
prevent such a reversal of her previous poiicy and to restore her 
influence over her son. In alliance with the duke of Anjou she 
determined to get rid of Coligny. He was fired at from a window 
near thé court and wounded, though not mortally. This attack 
made him more popular and more dangerous than ever. The Hu- 
guenots were assembled in great numbers to celebrate the wedding 
of Henry of Navarre. The population of Paris was fanatically 
hostile to them, and Catharine determined to free herself from all 
danger by a general massacre in which Coligny and _ his followers 
might share a common fate. The unfortunate Charles IX. was 
induced to give the necessary orders by the entreaties and threats of 
his mother and brother. At midnight on 24th August, 1572, the 
bell of St. Germain l’Auxerrois gave the appointed signal. The 
murder of Coligny was superintended by Henry of Guise, the son 
and successor of Francis. In Paris the mob rose and slaughtered 
the unsuspecting Huguenots. Other towns followed the example of 
the capital. Nearly 20,000 victims fell in this “Massacre of 
St. Bartholomew” or the “‘ Paris Matins.” 

It has often been asserted that the massacre had long ago been 
decided upon, and that Catharine had only waited for the favour- 
able moment to carry it out. It has been regarded as the direct 
outcome of Alva’s advice at the Conference of Bayonne. But this 
is not only improbable but almost impossible. Catharine’s guiding 
motive was not religious bigotry, but personal and dynastic am- 
bition. She could never have reckoned on so favourable a circum- 
stance as the presence of so many unarmed Huguenots in the midst 
of the bloodthirsty mob of Paris. Everything points clearly to the 
conclusion that, even if the idea lay already dormant in her n.ind, 
the impulse to its execution was sudden, and arose from the 
immediate position of affairs. 

§ 9. The news of the massacre roused the remaining Huguenots 
toanew war of defence. But, weakened as they were by the loss of 
their leaders, there seemed little prospect of their success. The 
government issued orders proscribing the reformed religion, and 
prepared four armies to reduce those towns which refused obedience. 
The heroic resistance offered by two towns, Rochelle and Sancerre, 
rivals the most celebrated deeds of antiquity. And meanwhile 
the massacres had called into existence a new party called the 
Politiques, which adhered to neither of the rival creeds, but in- 
sisted on the necessity of toleration. At its head were the Mont- 


n* 


122 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. IX. 


morencies, the sons of the Constable, who, though Catholics, inherited 
their father’s opposition to the Guises. The government found it 
impossible to carry out their policy. The edict of July, 1573, 
secured liberty of conscience and permitted the Huguenot worship 
in Rochelle, Nismes, and Montauban. ‘Through the mediation of 
the Polish envoy, Sancerre. was admitted to the same privileges. 

Thus the policy of massacre proved a failure. The Huguenots 
could not be crushed by such measures. Charlies IX., who never 
recovered after the horrors of St. Bartholomew, and was ever 
haunted by imaginary visions of its victims, died without male 
issue on May 380, 1574. The crown passed to his brother, 
Henry III, who had just ascended the throne of Poland, but 
who promptly deserted his northern kingdom, and made his way 
through Italy to France. ‘Till his arrival the administration fell 
once more into the hands of Catharine de Medici. 

§ 10. The moderate party endeavoured to take advantage of the 
change of government. Damville de Montmorency met the new 
king on the frontier, and obtained from him promises of toleration. 
But when Henry III. reached Paris, he scon fell under the 
influence of his mother and the Catholics, and adopted the extreme 
policy to which his own nature inclined him. ‘The contest was 
at once renewed. ‘lhe Politiques were strengthened by the 
junction of Francis of Alencon, Henry of Navarre, and the young 
prince of Condé. John Casimir of the Palatinate advanced to their 
assistance with German troops. Against this powerful confederacy 
the Government could only proceed with weapons of deceit. Con- 
cess‘ons were made to break up the hostile alliance without any 
intention of observing them. ‘lhe Huguenots were allowed the free 
exercise of their religion everywhere except in Paris and the country 
round; they were to be admitted to offices, and the judicial 
authority was to be vested in mixed parliaments. Alencon was 
bought off with the duchy of Anjou, and Condé with the administra- 
tion of Picardy. John Casimir received compensation and pay for 
his troops. The allies also demanded a meeting of the States- 
General, and these were convened at Blois in December, 1576; but 
with a very unexpected result. They adopted an attitude of 
uncompromising hostility to the reformed religion, and thus 
strengthened the hands of the Government. The Huguenots again 
took up arms; but, after an uneventful campaign,’ the king 
suddenly concluded peace by the edict of Poitiers or Bergerac, the 
most important of the numerous religious treaties. By this the 
extreme concessions of 1575 were revoked; but the reformed 
worship was allowed in all placcs where it was exercised on the 
day of the treaty. One town in each district and nine fortified 


A.D. 1573-1584. ‘THE LEAGUE. foo 


places of refuge were ceded to the Huguenots, while the nobles 
retained the privilege of private service. In the parliaments of 
Bordeaux, Grenoble, Aix, and Toulouse, fonr judges out of twelve — 
were to be Protestants. 

§ 11. Thus at last the great question as to how the two religions 
could exist side by side seemed to have received a practical solution. 
Tor the next seven years France enjoyed an unwonted respite from 
warfare. The peace might have been permanent but for the 
disastrous influence of foreign states. Never was the spirit of 
religious bigotry so active as at this period. By rulers who had 
applauded the massacre of St. Bartholomew, and who favoured 
plots for the assassination of Elizabeth of England and Wiliam of 
Orange, the vacillating government of France was regarded with 
abhorrence. Philip Il. was especially concerned. The Catholic 
reaction, for which he lived and worked, could not be completed 
without French co-operation. And he had personal motives for 
opposing a peaceful settlement of religious differences. A united 
France offered the greatest obstacles to Spanish ambition. Even 
in the court of Henry III. there were symptoms of opposition to 
his annexation of Portugal. And Henry’s brother, Francis of 
Anjou, appeared in the Netheriands as the avowed opponent of 
Spain, and the aspirant for the hand of the English queen. 
Before long events occurred which enabled Philip to ena 
decisively in irench politics. 

On Jane 10, 1584, Francis of Anjou-Alencon died unmarried. 
The house of Valois was evidently on the verge of extinction. 
Henry JII., its last representative, had no children, nor was he 
likely to have any. By the law of succession hitherto observed 
in France, the heir to the throne was Henry of Bourbon, the 
Calvinist king of Navarre and Béarn. But the prospect of a 
heretic king roused the bitterest feelings among the French 
Catholics, and especially among the Guises. They were already 
alienated by the promotion of royal favourites, who excluded 
them from office. At the instigation of the Spanish envoy, the 
Catholic League was formed at Joinville. Its leaders were Henry 
of Guise and his two brothers, the duke of Mayenne and the 
cardinal of Guise. Their avowed objects were to extirpate 
Protestantism in France, to exclude Henry of Navarre from the 
throne, which was to be given to his uncle, the cardinal of 
Bourbon, and to cede Navarre and Béarn to Philip JI. as the 
price of Spanish assistance. 

Thus a Catholic king of France found himself superseded by 
subjects of his own religion, who presumed to arrange the suc- 
cession to the crown, and to conduct independent negotiations 


124 MODERN EUROPE. Cap. Ix. 


with foreign powers. Had Henry III. been a man of foresight 
and energy, he would have allied himself with Henry of Navarre, 
with the still loyal Catholics, and with the Protestants both in 
France and the Netherlands. But under his mother’s influence, 
he negotiated with the League, and placed himself altogether in 
their power. All the edicts of pacification were revoked, and the 
Protestant religion was proscribed. The result was the outbreak 
of a new war, known as that of the three Henries. Henry IL, 
Henry of Guise, Henry of Navarre, were at the head of in- 
dependent armies. An army of mixed Germans and Swiss, 
under the command of Count Dohna, entered France to assist 
the Huguenots. ‘The king went to meet them, while he despatched 
the duke of Joyeux against Henry of Navarre. The latter won 
the first Huguenot victory at Coutras. Meanwhile Henry III. met 
the Germans, and induced Dohna and his troops to quit the king- 
dom. But the duke of Guise, disregarding this, attacked and 
inflicted great loss on the retreating army. 

§ 12. The result of the war was an immense increase of popularity 
for the League. Guise was welcomed as the heroic conqueror of 
the foreign invaders, to whom the king had basely truckled. In 
Paris, still the stronghold of Catholic bigotry, these feelings were 
especially strong. Henry III. found himself powerless in his own 
capital. The arrival of Guise gave new energy to the fanatical 
mob; they erected barricades in the streets, disarmed the royal 
troops, and Henry III. only escaped captivity by a hasty flight 
from Paris, which he never saw again (1588). 

In spite of this humiliation the king continued to treat with 
his enemies. He again summoned the States-General at Blois, 
and they insisted on the complete suppression of the Huguenots. 

The king gave way to them on every point, but they proceeded 
to cut down the royal revenues, and to insist on the removal of 
the royal favourites. Guise, who had arrived at Blois, was 
evidently all-powerful. In these straits Henry came to one of 
those violent resolutions which so often commend themselves to 
weak minds. The duke of Guise was invited to a conference in 
the royal cabinet and there murdered (December 23, 1588). 
His brother the cardinal was seized and executed, and the cardinal 
of Bourbon imprisoned. In the midst of these fearful events, 
Catharine de Medici died at Blois on January 5, 1589. 

The assassination of Guise produced open war between the king 
and the League. Under Mayenne’s guidance, Paris threw ‘off its 
allegiance and established a provisional government. The ex- 
ample was followed by most of the large towns. Henry III. 
found that he was a king without a kingdom. At last he was 


a ee a 


A.D. 1585-1592. ACCESSION OF HENRY IV. 125 


forced to take the step which might before have saved him. He 
united his forces with those of Henry of Navarre. Together they 
advanced to lay siege to Paris. Here Henry III. paid the penalty 
of his weakness and his crimes. A monk, Jacques Clement, made 
his way into the royal presence, and stabbed the king mortally 
with a dagger (August 1, 1589). 

§ 18. The line of Valois, which had ruled France since 1328, was 
now extinct, and the legitimate claimant to the throne was Henry 
of Navarre, who could trace his descent back to a younger son 
of Louis IX. He at once assumed the royal title as Henry IV. 
But his position was one of extraordinary difficulty, and it was 
necessary for him to conquer a kingdom before he could reign. He 
could only secure the support of the Catholics in his own camp 
by changing his relizion, and this would alienate the Huguenots. 
He took a middle course. He declared himself still open to 
conviction on religious matters, and he promised complete tolera- 
tion and the appointment of Catholic officers. But there was no 
prospect of a peaceful submission of his extreme enemies. In 
Paris, where the news of Henry III.’s death was welcomed with 
enthusiastic rejoicing, the cardinal of Bourbon was _ proclaimed 
king as Charies X. This was a mere fortn, as the cardinal was 
a prisoner in Henry’s ands. The real leader of the League, and 
therefore the ruler of Catholic France, was the duke ot Mayenne. 

Henry IV., who confronted his difficulties with unflinching 
courage, might have succeeded in conquering his enemies, but for 
the assistance they received from Spain. He defeated Mayenne at 
Ivry, and had already reduced Paris to great straits, when Alexander 
of Parma marched into France from the Netherlands, and compelled 
him to raise the siege (1590). In 1592 Parma again appeared in 
Normandy and saved Rouen from the royalist forces. Henry IV., 
with all his personal courage and activity, was out-generalled by 
the cautious Spanish commander. But, fortunately for him and 
for France, Parma died after his return to the Netherlands in 1592. 
While Henry was thus freed from his most formidable opponent, 
he also reaped great advantages from the divisions among the 
French Catholics. France, divided into hostile camps, without any 
central authority, was in a state of anarchy and confusion, which 
if continued must end in national ruin. Henry IV. offered one 
solution, his own accession and religious toleration. His enemies 
were bound to offer an alternative. The cardinal of Bourbon, who 
was only used as a puppet, had died, still in captivity, in 1590. 
Spanish influence was all-powerful among the leaguers, and was 
wielded by the envoy Mendoza. It was almost decided to put 
aside the Salic law, and to acknowledge Philip’s daughter the 


126 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. 1x. 


Infanta Isabella. But a difficulty arose about the choice of a 
husband for her. Philip himself wished her to marry her second 
cousin, Ernest of Austria. He hoped to compensate the Hapsburgs 
for their losses iv. the war with Envland and the Netherlands 
by gaining for them the crown of France. But the national 
spirit, weakened as it was by religious differences, was too strong 
to submit to a foreign king. Philip then proposed Charles of 
Guise, the son of the murdered duke. ‘This was acceptable to most 
of the Catholics, but not to Mayenne, who aimed at the crown 
himself and refused to be put aside in favour of his nephew. 
hese divisions ruined the Catholic cause. And in 1593 Henry IY. 
decided the fate of France by formally adopting the Catholic 
religion. The reaction against Spanish influence induced many 
of the leaguers to embrace this opportunity of going over to the 
legitimate king. Henry entered Paris in triumph in 1594. He 
at once declared war against Spain, which still supported the 
remnants of the League. All loyal Frenchmen rallied to his 
standard. In 1595 the pope, Clement VIII., withdrew the bull of 
excommunication and acknowledged him as king. In 1596 the 
duke of Mayenne submitted on very favourable terms. In 1598 
Philip II., conscious that he was near the end of his life, and 
that his policy had proved a failure, concluded the Peace of 
Vervins, which confirmed the treaty of Cateau-Cambresis. All 
the conquests which had been made by Spain and Savoy were 
restored, and France regained its ancient boundaries. The most 
obstinate member of the league, the duke of Mercceur, at last 
submitted, and acknowledged Henry IV. 

§ £4. Thus, after nearly forty years of anarchy, a national monarchy 
was re-established in France. But still Henry IV. had only crossed 
the threshold of his difficulty. It required years of cautious and 
enlightened government before the kingdom could recover from the 
confusion and losses of the civil wars. The first necessity was the 
settlement of a religious peace, which was accomplished by the 
famous Edict of Nantes (April 18, 1598). The Catholic church 
retained its supremacy and its revenues, and all dissenters from it 
were compelled to pay tithes and to observe the religious festivals. 
But the Huguenots obtained liberty of conscience and the right of 
public service in all places where it had been celebrated in 1577. 
Their ecclesiastical expenses were to be defrayed by themselves 
with the help of a yearly contribution from the king. The nobles 
retained the special religious privileges which had been given them 
by previous edicts. Offices were to be open to members of both 
creeds, and the parliaments were to be composed of mixed chambers. 
As a security for these concessions, a number of fortresses, including 


A.D. 1593-1601. ADMINISTRATION OF SULLY. dil 


Nismes, Montauban and La Rochelle, were ceded to the Huguenots 
for eight years. The king promised to defray part of the expense 
of the garrisons. The pope, Clement VIII, was induced, not 
without difficuity, to confirm the Edict of Nantes. He also 
divorced the king from his first wife, Margaret of Valois, and 
enabled him to marry Mary of Medici, daughter of Francis grand 
duke of ‘Tuscany (1599). In 1601 the birth of an heir ensured the 
continuance of the Bourbon dynasty. 

Next in importance to the religious settlement came the question 
of finances. Ever since the death of Irencis I. the financial condi- 
tion of France had gone from bad to worse. Corruption prevailed 
among all the officials: the most reckless methods of raising money 
had been resorted to. Patents of nobility had been sold, and thus 
the number of taxpayers was reduced. ‘Though the taxes were enor- 
mously heavy, so wasteful was the administration that they brought 
hardly anything into the treasury. ‘The expenditure was ten 
times larger than the revenue. Every year the deficit increased, 
and at Henry IYV.’s accession the public debt was estimated at 
£345,000,000, an enormous sum for those days. And the rate of 
interest varied from eight to ten per cent., so that it absorbed 
the whole of the annual revenue, which was not more than 
£30,000,000. 

The task of evolving order in the midst of this confusion was 
entrusted to one of Henry’s comrades in arms, the duke of Sully, 
the most conscientious, if not the most able of French administra- 
tors. Heedless of the interests of individuals when they were at 
variance with the welfare of the state, Sully instituted a series of 
sweeping reforms. A number of sinecure offices, which had been 
created merely to raise money by their sale, were swept away. 
Seats in the parliament, hitherto purchasable, were made heredi- 
tary on the payment of an annual tax (the Pazlette) by their 
holders. ‘Thus a lawyer-caste was created in France which occupied 
a unique position in the history of the country. Holders of royal 
domains were compelled to prove their title, and large territories 
were recovered. ‘I'he system of collecting the taxes was reformed 
and made more orderly and economical. Patents of nobility were 
revised and in many cases revoked, While he thus increased the 
revenues, Sully also diminished expenses, and was thus enabled to 
pay off £147,000,000 of the debt. These and other reforms, which — 
affected so closely the interests of powerful classes, could only have 
been carried out by a minister like Sully whose personal honesty 
was above suspicion. 

§ 15. Nor was the king himself behindhand in the work of reform. 
Henry IV.’s devotion to the national welfare has been fondly 


128 MODERN EUROPE. Cuar. Ix. 


recorded by his countrymen in the wish attributed to him that 
“every peasant might have a fowl in his pot on Sundays.” While 
Sully was especially anxious to revive agriculture, Henry set 
himself to encourage manufactures and commerce, ‘The silk- 
manufacture, which has become so important an industry in 
France, was introduced by him, and he planted the Tuileries 
eardens with mulberry-trees. Marseilles became a great mercan- 
tile and Toulon a great naval port. Discoverers were sent out 
under royal patronage to establish colonies in America. Port 
Royal (Annapolis) was founded in 1604, and Quebec in 1608. 
Henry even aimed at the formation of an Indian company which 
might rival the enterprise of the English and Dutch in the east. 

By these and similar measures a foundation was laid for the 
revival of national. prosperity in France. But for the government 
of Henry IV. there could have been no “age of Louis XIV.” It 
is no wonder that the chivalrous, popular Henry of Navarre has 
lived long in the grateful memory of his people. Yet the permanent 
interests of France undoubtedly suffered from his rule. He made 
no eflort to establish constitutional government under which the 
people might have been trained in the habits of self-rule. It 
was perhaps impossible for him to do so. It has been one of the 
misfortunes of France that it has been periodically brought to the 
verge of ruin either by foreign invasion or domestic divisions. It 
has been necessary to restore order with the strong hand, and 
despotism has been welcomed by the people as the only antidote 
for existing evils. Henry IV. and Sully unquestionably con- 
tributed to that over-centralisation which was completed by 
Richelieu, and of which the monarchy paid the penalty in the 
Revolution. 

The foreign policy of Henry IV. was as simple and consistent as 
the objects of his domestic government. He wished to combine 
against the Austro-Spanish power all hostile elements in Germany, 
the Netherlands, Italy and the northern States. By destroying the 
Hapsburg supremacy, he hoped to establish a new system of 
European politics, of which France should be the centre. He did 
not live long enough to execute so grand a project, but he bequeathed 
it to his successors. Henry IV. was preparing a great force to 
interfere decisively on behalf of the Protestant powers, when he 
was assassinated in the streets of Paris by the dagger of Francois 
Ravaillac (May 14, 1610). ~ 


CHAPTER X. 
GERMANY AFTER CHARLES V., AND THE THIRTY YEARS’ WAR. 


§ 1. Germany and the Counter-Reformation. § 2. Progress of Protestan- 
tism under Ferdinand J. and Maximilian I]. § 3. Protestant disunien 
and Catholic advance. § 4. Rudolf H. § 5. Disputes between Pro- 
testants and Catholics. § 6. The Union and the League. § 7. Succes- 
sion question in Jiilich and Cleve. § 8. Rudolf II. and Matthias. § 9. 
Ferdinand of Styria and the succession to the Hapsburg territories. 
§ 10. Bohemian insurrection; crown accepted by the Elector Palatine. 
§ 11. War in Bohemia; victory of the Catholic League. § 12. Atti- 
tude of France, Denmark and Sweden. § 13. Danish war; Wallen- 

_ stein’s successes and policy; siege of Stralsund. § 14. Mantuan 
succession ; Edict of Restitution and dismissal of Wallenstein. § 15. 
Gustavus Adolphus in Germany; his successes. § 16. Wallenstein’s 
second command; death of Gustavus Adolphus at Liitzen. § 17. 
Assassination of Wallenstein; battle of Nordlingen; treaty of Prague. 
§ 18. Last period ofthe war. §19. Negotiations; peace of Westphalia; 
results of the war. 


§ 1. Tur main interest of the history of all European countries during 
the last half of the sixteenth century centres round the success or 
failure of the Counter-Reformation. In Italy and Spain Catholicism 
succeeded not only in holding its ground but also in sternly 
repressing all opposing beliefs. In France the long wars of religion 
ended in a compromise, the Edict of Nantes, but, on the whole, 
victory rested with the Catholics. In the Netherlands the grand 
conflict with Spain produced a division between the provinces. The 
northern states formed a republic under the house of Orange The 
Walloon provinces, more exposed to Romish influence, returned to 
the Spanish allegiance. In England the Catholic reaction failed 
altogether owing to the national spirit evoked by Spanish interven- 
tion. In Sweden the Jesuits almost accomplished the conversion of 
John III. (1568-92), the second son of Gustavus Vasa ; but national 
interests proved in the end too strong for them. John’s son, 
Sigismund, an avowed Catholic, was elected king of Poland, but 
forfeited the Swedish crown to his uncle, Charles IX. Germany, 
the starting-point of the Reformation, was affected no less than 
other countries by the reactionary movement. The Thirty Years’ 


130 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. X. 


War, to which this ultimately gave rise, proved a more desolating 
and extensive conflict than any of the other religious wars. 

The Treaty of Augsburg (1555) was in itself too vague and too 
distasteful both to Protestants and Catholics, to furnish a satisfac- 
tory basis of peace. The so-called “ ecclesiastical reservation ” 
proved a fertile source of disputes. ‘The spread of Calvinism 
produced a number of Protestants whose interests were not recog- 
nised by the treaty. But its cardinal defect was that it gave no 
security for freedom of conscience, \but placed the settlement of 
religious questions in the hands of the territorial princes.) This 
makes German history at this period more than usually difficult 
and complicated. Religion is no longer, as under Charles V., a 
question for the whole empire, but for each individual state. 

§ 2. The Catholics had hoped by the ecclesiastical reservation to 
stay the further progress of Protestantism. In this they were dis- 
appointed. In almost every province the adherents of the 
reformed faith increased in numbers and importance. Protestant 
“‘administrators” obtained the bishoprics of Magdeburg, Bremen, 
Halberstadt, Lubeck and others. In the great archbishoprics of 
Trier and Cologne it was found impossible to exclude Protestant 
preachers. ven in Bavaria and the Austrian provinces the 
Lutheran doctrine spread rapidly. A Venetian envoy computed 
that in 1558 only a tenth part of the German population remained 
faithtul to Catholicism. Charles V.’s successor, Ferdinand L., 
though he remained personally orthodox, took no measures to 
repress reform. It is worth remembering that this prince was the 
first who definitely gave up the old ceremony of a_ papal 
coronation. Henceforth the elected king of Germany assumes at 
once the title of emperor, and thus the popes are deprived of their 
chief means of interference in German affairs. Jerdinand was 
succeeded by his eldest son, Maximilian II., who was seriously 
inclined to Lutheranism, and it was only his connection with Spain 
and his regard for family interests that prevented his public 
conversion, But he pursued a policy of enlightened toleration, 
in which he was unfortunately far in advance of his age. Thus 
the policy of Charles V. was completely surrendered: by his suc- 
cessors. ‘Ihe emperor no longer seeks to establish the religious 
unity of Germany, but stands as mediator between the two opposing 
beliefs. 

§ 3. For a time Protestantism advanced so rapidly that it appeared 
possible that Germany might be altogether severed from the 
Church. But the greatness of the danger aroused corresponding 
enerey in the declining faith and led to a strong Catholic reaction. 
This was facilitated by disunion among the Protestants themselves. 


j 
; 
q 


A.D. 1555-1600. GERMANY AFTER CHARLES V. 181 


Their leaders were the duke of Saxony and the Elector Palatine, 
and they were unfortunately opposed to each other on doctrinal 
points. Saxony was fanatically Lutheran. When Christian I. 
(1586-1591), under the influence of his chancellor Crell, en- 
deavoured to secure toleration for the Calvinists as the basis of 
a general Protestant alliance, he met with vehement opposition 
from his own subjects. The sudden death of the elector left the 
guardianship of his infant son to a Lutheran relative, Frederick 
William. Crell was imprisoned and put to death in 1601. 
Calvinism was suppressed in Saxony with a strong hand. Christian 
II. was succeeded in 1611 by his brother John George, who during 
a long reign was the head of the Lutheran party, and by his 
obstinate antipathy to Calvinism did incalculable harm to the 
Protestant cause in Germany. 

In the Palatinate, owing to its geographical position, the influence 
of Trance and the Netherlands was strongly felt. This led to the 
establishment of Calvinism under Frederick 111. (1557-1576), the 
first elector of the Simmern branch. His son and successor, Lewis 
VI. (1576-1580), was a Lutheran, and tried to effect a reconciliation 
between the two creeds. Lut the scheme ended with his life. His 
brother, John Casimir, became guardian of the young elector, 
_ Frederick IV. (1583-1610). Under the new rule Calvinism was 
thoroughly re-established in the Palatinate. Frederick was succeeded 
in 1610 by his son Frederick V., who married the English princess 
Elizabeth, and who figures very prominently in the first part of the 
Thirty Years’ War. ; 

This division of the Protestants into two hostile camps was fatal 
to their advance, and gave a great opportunity to the champions of 
the Catholic reaction. The Jesuits had been admitted into Germany 
by Ferdinand I., and before long their zeal and energy produced 
important results. heir schools surpassed those of the Protestant 
teachers, and enabled them to gain a firm hold over the rising 
generation. But their great obiect was to induce those princes 
who remained Catholic, to pursue a more active policy in their 
dominions. Jn Bavaria, Protestantism was put down by Albert 
III. (1550-1579), and this duchy became the centre of the Catholic . 
movement. In Trier, Bamberg, Fulda, and other places. a simi- 
liar policy was successfully pursued. Protestants were first 
excluded from all offices and finally forced into either recantation or 
exile. 

§ 4. A great-object of the Catholics was to make some impression 
on the hereditary domains of the house of Hapsburg, where, under 
Ferdinand J. and Maximilian II., Protestantism had made startling 
progress. Maximilian had five sons by his wife Mary, a daughter of 


132 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. x. 


Charles V., but he wisely gave up the family custom of subdivision 
and left the administration of Hungary, Bohemia and Austria to 
the eldest, Rudolf II., who was also elected emperor. Rudolf, educated 
first by his mother and afterwards at the court of Phillip IJ., was 
imbued with Spanish ideas both in religion and politics. He had 
an exaggerated conception of his own dignity, and no respect for the 
religious beliefs or political interests of his subjects. His first act 
was to expel from Vienna Opitz and other Protestant preachers, and 
he thus gave the first impulse to a Catholic reaction in Austria. 
Unfortunately, however, for the Catholic party, Rudolf, though not 
without ability, was not of a character to interfere vigorously in the 
affairs of the empire. He held himself aloof from politics and 
devoted himself in his castle of Prague to alchemy andastrology. 
But it was a great thing that the policy of his two predecessors was 
given up by Rudolf, and that the imperial influence, however small, 
was henceforth assured to the Catholics. They were now determined 
to enforce throughout the empire their interpretation of the religious 
peace and especially of the ecclesiastical reservation. Thus they 
hoped to resist any further progress of Protestantism, and, if cireum- 
stances favoured them, to reduce it to the old limits of 1552. 

§ 5. At the Diet of 1582 an important contest arose about the 
bishopric of Magdeburg, to which was attached the presidency in 
the College of Princes. Its present holder was a Protestant, Joachim 
Frederick of Brandenburg. The Catholics refused to his deputy 
not only the presidency, but even admission to the Diet, on the 
ground that he was not lawful bishop. ‘This was a point of the 
highest importance, as the admission of the Catholic ruling would 
have excluded many of the Protestant princes from political in- 
fiuence. It was impossible to come to any compromise on the 
question, which remained a source of difficulty at each successive 
diet. A similar question arose in the third College of the Diet, that 
of the cities. Aachen, long a Catholic city, had fallen at last under 
the government of a Protestant majority. An attempt was made 
to exclude its deputies from the Diet, but the other towns regarded 
this as an attack on their liberties, and admitted the deputies, 
though they had received no regular summons. ‘This also remained 
unsettled until 1598 when Catholicism was restored in Aachen by 
a military force. 

Still more important were the events in Cologne at this time. 
The Protestant interpretation of the ecclesiastical reservation was 
that it did not apply to the case of a Protestant bishop lawfully 
elected. .by the chapter. But they had never yet held that’ a 
Catholic bishop might go over to Protestantisra and yet hold his 
see in defiance of the chapter. A previous elector of Cologne, 


ee a 


i7p.51581. GEBHARD TRUCHSESS. 1338 


Hermann von der Wied, had married, and had at once resigned. 
But in 1581, the archbishop Gebhard Truchsess married Agnes 
of Mansfeld, and announced his conversion to the reformed faith 
and at the same time his determination te retain his see. This 
was of immense importance, because the defection of the archbishop 
of Cologne would give the Protestants a majority in the electoral 
College. ‘The Catholics took the strongest measures. The pope 
issued a bull of deposition, and the temporal princes armed to 
support it. Truchsess, having adopted Calvinism, found no 
supporters among the Lutherans. He was driven from his see, 
and lived in exile till his death in 1601. This was a great victory 
for the Catholics, and encouraged them to take further measures. 
They had a majority in the Imperial Chamber, the supreme court 
of the empire. All legal disputes were decided against’ the Pro- 
testants. Besides this, an attempt was made to increase the authority 
of the Aulic Council, an institution which had no imperial sanction, 
but was merely a private court of the emperor, whose wishes it 
unhesitatingly carried out. 

§ 6. Thus the imperial constitution failed % supply an.efficient 
administrative machinery. The Diet could come-to_no. decisions, 
and even if it did, they were rejected by the minority.-The judicial 
courts were on the side of one party, and the other refused to re- 
cognise their authority. It was evident that the Protestants could 
only rely for security on their own exertions. ‘Their obvious policy 
was to form a defensive union among themselves. This object 
was steadily pursued by the court of the elector palatine under 
the guidance of an able minister, Christian of Anhalt. But for 
some time all attempts failed through the want of union between 
Calvinists and Lutherans, and the invincible sluggishness of Saxony. 
But at last events happened which compelled immediate action. 

Donauworth, a free imperial city, was so completely Protestant 
that the attempt of an abbot to conduct a religious procession 
through the streets produced a violent tumult. The matter was 
brought, with doubtful legality, before the Aulic Council, and that 
body, without a formal trial, issued the imperial ban against the 
town and entrusted its execution to Maximilian of Bavaria. That 
prince was ene of the ablest of German princes and the recognised 
leader of the Catholic party. His devotion to his religion did not, 
however, prevent an enlightened regard for his own interests. He 
had long foreseen the possibility of war and was prepared for the 
emergency. His troops marched against Donauworth, and not only 
forcibly suppressed the Protestant religion, but practically annexed 
the town to Bavaria. This high-handed act on the part of the 
Aulic Council and of Maximilian convinced the Protestants of the 


134 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. x. 


danger in which they stood. At the diet of Ratisbon (1608) they 
made vehement protests, and these being disregarded, they left the 
assembly. Almost directly afterwards, Christian of Anhalt suc- 
ceeded in inducing the Protestant princes and towns of southern 
Germany to form a league at Ahausen. It was impossible as 
yet to persuade the Lutherans of Germany to join them. The 
Catholics on their side were equally prompt. Under the leadership 
of Maximilian, a Catholic league was,formed at Munich in July 
1609. 

§ 7. Thus the imperial constitution was broken down by religious 
differences, and the two parties stood face to face, both prepared 
for war, but neither willing to strike the first blow. A disputed 
succession in Jiilich and Cleve almost precipitated the struggle. 
On the death of the childless duke, John William, in 1609, a 
number of claimants to his territories arose. Of these the most 
prominent were John Sigismund of Brandenburg and Wolfgang 
William, son of the duke of Neuburg. But both were Lutherans, 
and the presence of heretics so near to the Netherlands aroused 
the fears of Spain. ‘The emperor Rudolf was induced to claim the 
vacant provinces as imperial fiefs. In face of this danger the two 
claimants formed an alliance and took joint possession. A general 
war seemed inevitable. As the Catholics relied on Spain, so the 
Protestants turned to France, and in 1610 a treaty was made 


between Henry IV. and the Union. Henry was determined to: 


seize the opportunity of humbling his old enemies the Hapsburgs. 
He was preparing to lead a large army from France, when his life 
was taken by Ravaillac. France fell under the miserable regency 
of Marie de Medici, and the danger of a European war was for the 
time over. Jiilich and Cleve remained in the hands of the two 
joint possessors. But the difficulty of finding a permanent settle- 
ment again endangered peace. Wolfgang William proposed to his 
rival to marry his daughter and to take the whole territories. The 
elector of Brandenburg, enraged at the impudent proposal, boxed 
the youthful speaker’s ears. Wolfgang William went over to 
Catholicism, married a daughter of Maximilian, and threw himself 
on the protection of the League. Spanish and Dutch troops were 
called in by either side. But there was still a general abhorrence 
of war. At Xanten a truce was concluded by which Jiilich and 
Cleve were divided between Brandenburg and Neuburg. Thus the 
outbreak of war was again postponed. For its immediate causes 
we must turn to the history of the house of Hapsburg. 

§ 8. Ferdinand I. had divided his territories between his three 
sons. Maximilian II. received Austria, Hungary, and Bohemia; 
Ferdinand, Tyrol; and Charles, Styria and Carinthia. Ferdinand 


A.D. 1576-1612. REIGN OF RUDOLF IL. 135 


died without legitimate issue and 'l'yrol reverted to the elder line. 
Charles of Styria was succeeded in 1596 by his son, afterwards the 
emperor Ferdinand II., Maximilian’s territories passed; as has been 
seen, to Rudolf I., while the younger sons Yeceived compensation 
elsewhere. Ernest was intrusted with the administration of Austria, 
which fell after his death to Matthias; Maximilian was made 
governor of ‘l'yrol ; and Albert was married to Philip IL.’s daughter 
and became regent of the Spanish Netherlands. 

Rudolf IL.’s government in his hereditary dominions was more 
active but quite as unsuccessful as in the empire. His attempts te 
put down the Protestant doctrines, and with them the political 
privileges of his subjects, led to open revolts. In Hungary the 
rebels gained the support of the ‘lurks, and established virtual 
independence. So serious did matters appear, that the other 
members of the family determined to combine against their in- 
capable head and to entrust the administration to the archduke 
Matthias. But Rudolf resisted all attempts to diminish his power 
with an obstinacy akin to madness. Compelled to entrust affairs in 
Hungary to his brother, he refused to ratify his acts, and especially 
his treaty with the Turks. At last, in 1608, the archdukes took up 
arms and compelled Rudolf, by the treaty of Lieben, to cede 
Hungary, Austria, and Moravia to Matthias, and to promise him the 
succession in Bohemia. ‘These events were unfavourable to the 
Catholics. Matthias was forced to make concessions in Hungary 
and Austria, while the Bohemians took advantage of Rudolf’s 
difficulties to extort from him the famous “ Letter of Majesty ” 
(1609). ‘This secured freedom of conscience to all Bohemians, but 
freedom of worship only to members of the assembly of estates. On 
the royal domains complete toleration was to be assured. Rudolf 
tried hard to evade these conditions, which placed him in an inferior 
position to other landholders. But he only provoked a new revolt, 
which in 1611 deposed him and transferred the Bohemian crown to 
Matthias. In January, 1612, while still struggling to regain his 
lost power, Rudolf died. ‘he imperial crown followed the others 
and was conferred by the electors upon Matthias, 

§ 9. Matthias had now stepped altogether into Rudolf’s place, and 
found himself face to face with the difficulties which had crushed 
his brother. In Bohemia and Austria religious differences were by 
no means ended by the concessions made to the Protestants, and 
the attempt to evade these concessions produced serious disaffection. 
In Hungary the royal power was almost null. Transylvania had 
been made practically independent by Bethlen Gabor, who was 
supported by the Turks. The empire would render no assistance. 
At a diet at Ratisbon in 1613 Matthias demanded aid against the 


136 MODERN EUROPE. CHap. x. 


Turks; but the assembly would consider nothing but the old 
religious questions and had to be dissolved. ‘I'his was the last diet 
held before the war, and marks the final collapse of orderly 
constitutional arrangements. Matthias being old and childless, the 
Aust‘ian princes saw that family interests required some settlement 
of the succession. The elder archdukes agreed to renounce their 
claims in favour of Ferdinand of Styria, the emperor’s cousin. He 
had been educated with Maximilian of Bavaria at the Jesuit 
university of Ingolstadt, and was imbued with the most extreme 
ideas of the Catholic reaction. He had earned the papal gratitude 
by the forcible restoration of Catholicism in Styria and Carinthia. 
A prince of equal bigotry and ability was now to become head of 
the Hapsburgs and to resume the policy which had been abandoned 


~ since Charles V.’s defeat by Maurice of Saxony. 


§ 10. The only province where serious opposition to Ferdinand was 
anticipated was Bohemia, where the anti-Catholic party was very 
strong and inherited some of the spirit of the old Hussites, and 
where the crown was considered elective. Ferdinand I. had 
declared the succession to be hereditary, but Matthias himself had 
in 1608 acknowledged the right of election. This difficulty, how- 
ever, was overcome. ‘The estates were suddenly summoned in 1617 
and induced by promises and threats to recognise Ferdinand as heir 
to the throne. It was soon evident that the Bohemians had lost 
the most favourable opportunity of maintaining their liberties. 
The government became more and more Catholic and tyrannical. 
The Letter of Majesty, which Ferdinand had sworn to observe, 
was disregarded. Protestant churches were demolished and the 
government was entrusted to two men, Martinitz and Slawata, who 
were fanatical Catholics. In these circumstances the Bohemian 
nobles, headed by count Thurn, determined to take up arms. ‘The 
revolt commenced in Prague, where the two unpopular ministers 
were thrown from a window of the town-hall. This act proved the 
commencement of an European war. Want of space forbids any 
detailed account of military movements, and a general sketch of the 
main events must suflice. 

Ferdinand II. at once determined to enforce his authority in 
Bohemia. An army of mercenaries was despatched thither under 
Bucquoi, which was opposed by a native force under Thurn and by 
count Ernest of Mansfeld, who commanded troops in the pay of 
the duke of Savoy. Nothing decisive was done in 1618. The 
next year Thurn made a bold march upon Vienna, and Ferdinand 
was, for a moment, in extreme danger. But he was saved by a 
defeat inflicted on Mansfeld by Bucquoi which compelled the 
Bohemians to retire. Ferdinand at once hurried to Germany, 


A.D. 1617—1620. OUTBREAK OF THE WAR. 137 


where Matthias’ death had necessitated a new imperial election. 
The division between Saxony and the Palatinate, and the modera- 
tion of Maximilian of Bavaria secured to him the crown (28 August, 
1619). Two days beforehand an election of, equal importance took 
place in Bohemia. ‘The rebels were anxious to fortify themselves 
with foreign alliances. They had gained over Bethlen Gabor, the 
adventurous prince of Transylvania, and they received support from 
Savoy. But their great object was to enlist on their side the 
Protestant Union of Germany. It was decided to offer the 
Bohemian crown to Frederick V., elector Palatine and head of 
the Union. Dazzled by ambition, and urged on by Christian of 
Anhalt, he accepted the offer, though his allies were hesitating 
and his father-in-law, James L., refused any active support. On 
the 26th of August, Ferdinand was deposed and Fredcr.ck elected 
in his place. With great pomp he left Heide.berg and was crowned 
at Prague. 

§ 11. This act of aggression, which threatened to give a second 
electorate to a Protestant prince, stirred the Catholic world to its 
depths. Maximilian of Bavaria and the League at once espoused 
the Hapsburg cause, from which they had hitherto held aloof, 
Ferdinand promised the Upper Palatinate to Maximilian, and in 
the meantime offered to cede Upper Austria as a security for his 
military expenses. ‘The northern Protestants, who were unwilling to 
support a Calvinist usurper, pledged themselves to neutrality at 
Miiblhausen. In return for this, Ferdinand promised to respect the 
secularised bishoprics, and ceded Lausitz to the Lutheran leader, 
John George of Saxony. By these sacrifices Ferdinand insured his 
success, Frederick’s cause was hopeless. His new subjects were 
alienated by his bigoted Calvinism. ‘The army of the League under 
Tilly, a Walloon leader of capacity and experience, entered Bohemia 
defeated Frederick at the White Hill (8 Nov. 1620), and drove him 
from the kingdom. Spanish troops under Spinola invaded the 
Palatinate. ‘lhe allies of the unfortunate ‘‘ winter-king” did 
nothing to help him. James I. trusted to futile negotiations with 
Spain. The Union gave no support to its nominal head, and soon 
afterwards was formally dissolved. 

Thus the Catholic League obtained immediate and complete 
victory. The only troops which held the field against them were 
commanded by adventurers like Christian of Brunswick and Mans- 
feld. As they had no regular pay, the soldiers lived by pillaging 
the countries where they were quartered. Such troops might do 
infinite damage, but could hardly gain any lasting success. ‘Tilly 
was more than a match for them even when united. Had the 
Catholics been content to make a moderate use of their triumph, 

8 


138 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. x. 


they might have speedily ended the war. But they were encouraged 
to adopt an extreme and aggressive policy. In Bohemia, Protes- 
tantism was suppressed with such rigour that it never afterwards 
raised its head. Upper Austria was purged of heresy by similar 
measures. Still more unpopular was the rigorous vengeance taken 
on the elector palatine. His hereditary dominions were conquered, 
the Lower Palatinate by the Spaniards, the Upper by Bavaria. 
Frederick was forced to live in exile at the Hague, ever busied with 
futile schemes for the recovery of his territory. Even his electoral 
dignity was declared forfeited, and in 1623 was transferred to 
Maximilian. This was of the greatest importance, because the 
Bavarian vote added to those of the three clerical electors, gave 
the Catholics a definite majority in the electoral college, hitherto 
equally divided. 

§ 12. These high-handed measures preduced an inevitable reaction. 
It was feared that Ferdinand, with the support of Spain, might now 
revive Charles V.’s schemes, and restore religious unity in Germany 
under the absolute rule of the house of Hapsburg. Those princes 
who had refused to strike a blow for Protestantism were alarmed 
by the danger to their independence. ‘The Lower Saxon circle 
showed the greatest uneasiness, but they dared take no decisive 
steps without external assistance. Germany seemed prostrate at 
the feet of emperor and League. But this sudden revival of the 
Austrian power aroused misgivings not only in Germany but also 
among the neighbouring states. France, the old antagonist of the 
Hapsburgs, was naturally the first to take alarm. Ever since 
Henry 1V.’s death, the French government, absorbed in petty 
court intrigues, had done nothing of importance in foreign politics. 
But pressing danger at last put an end to this inactivity. For the 
tise of Austria was not only alarming in itself, it also gave new 
strength and courage to Spain. The two Hapsburg powers had 
lately obtained a definite geographical connexion by the Spanish 
occupation of the Valtelline, a pass which gave easy communica- 
tion between Italy and the Austrian province of Tyrol. Here was 
a serious danger for France, It was at this moment that Richelieu 
(1624) became chief minister of Louis XII]. His great object was 
to depress the Austro-Spanish power, and to raise the French 
monarchy to its place. He succeeded in breaking off the proposed 
alliance ‘between England and Spain, and prince Charles was 
married to the French princess Henrietta Maria instead of the 
Infanta. Although a Catholic and a cardinal, Richelieu had no 
hesitation in supporting the Protestant cause in Germany. In this 
he was only following the lines of policy laid down by Francis I. 
and Henry I.- His first direct interference was in Italy, where 


os ee ee 


; 
. 


A.D. 1623-1626. INTERVENTION OF DENMARK. 139 


French troops drove the Spaniards from the Valtelline. But this 
active policy was suddenly checked by the outbreak of a Huguenot 
revolt in France. Richelieu was compelled to conclude the treaty . 
of Monzon with Spain and to concentrate his attention on the 
reduction of the Huguenot fortress of La Rochelle. By the treaty 
the Valtelline was restored to the Protestant community of the 
Grisons, from which it had been conquered by Spain. 

Though the allies of France were disconcerted by this sudden 
desertion, the Protestant cause had undoubtedly received a great 
impulse. ‘The war had begun to absorb the interest of Europe. It 
was no longer possible to regard it as an internal affair of Germany. « 
Political as well as religious interests were involved and both of the 
highest importance. ‘Two princes deeply interested in the course of 
German events were Christian IV. of Denmark and Gustavus 
Adolphus of Sweden, Christian, as duke of Holstein, was a member 
of the Lower Saxon circle, and a prince of the empire. He had. 
obtained for his son the bishopric of Verden and the coadjutor- 
ship cf Bremen. He was thus directly interested in maintaining 
the Protestant bishoprics, which were threatened by the Catholic 
victory. ‘The Swedish king was more ardently Protestant than 
Christian, and had also secular interests at stake. His chiet 
enemy was Sigismund III. of Poland, who by strict hereditary 
right could claim the Swedish crown, and who relied for assistance 
on his brother-in-law Ferdinand II. The independence of Sweden, 
tceo, would be jeopardised by the establishment of a strong imperial 
power in northern Germany. ‘Thus both these kings were anxious 
io head the Protestant oy-position to the Hapsburgs, but internal 
jealousies prevented their acting together. ‘Ihe decision as to 
which should undertake the task rested with the English king. 
He decided in favour of Christian, whose plans were the more 
‘sanguine and demanded less money. In 1626 the Danish king was 
acknowledged head of the Lower Saxon circle, and prepared with 
the aid of English men and money to interfere in Germany. 
Gustavus had to content himself with the war in Poland, which 
was indirectly of assistance to the Protestant cause. 

§ 13. Besides the Danish king, the emperor had to make head 
against Mansfeld and Christian of Brunswick, who still held the field, 
and also Bethlen Gabor, who threatened an attack from the east. ‘l’o 
these numerous enemies he could only oppose one army, that of the 
League commanded by Tilly. The imperial treasury was empty. 
At this juncture one of Ferdinand’s own subjects came forward with 
a noteworthy scheme. Albert of Waldstein, or Wallenstein, was 
the descendant of an old Bohemian noble family. By espousing 
the royal cause in the Bohemian wars he had obtained distinction 


140 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. x. 


and wealth and had been created prince of Friedland. He now 
offered to raise an army for the emperor’s service which was to cost 
him nothing. It was to be supported, not by disorderly pillage 
like the soidiers of Mansfeld, but by forced contributions.  Regard- 
less of the fact that such measures were of doubtful legality, 
Ferdinand accepted the offer. ‘The new army was speedily formed, 
and advanced to support Tilly. Mansfeld was defeated at the 
bridge of Dessau, and retreated into Hungary to join Bethlen Gabor. 
While Wallenstein pursued him, Tilly routed the forces of 
Christian IV. at Lutter (August, 1626). In the east Wallenstein 
was completely successful. Mansfeld had to retire to Venetian 
territory, where he died. Christian of Brunswick was already dead. 
A treaty with the Turks (1627), who were occupied with a Persian 
war, put an end to further danger from Bethlen Gabor. Wallen- 
stein was now free to turn his attention to German affairs. He 
defeated the Danes at Cosel, and drove them from Silesia. Follow- 
ing the enemy northwards, he occupied Mecklenburg, and then 
attacked the Danish territories. Holstein, Schleswig, and Jutland 
were overrun, and it was only the want of a fleet that prevented the 
complete conquest of Denmark. Foreign relations at the same 
time were favourable to the emperor. France and England had 
quarrelled, and Buckingham led a fleet to the assistance of La 
Rochelle (1627). And Charles I.’s disputes with his parliament 
rendered him unable to send the stipulated supplies to Christian, 
without which his army could not be paid. 

The victory of the Catholic cause was as complete in northern 
Germany in 1627 as it had been in Bohemia and the Palatinate 
in 1623. But circumstances had completely changed between the 
two years. The earlier victory had been won by the Catholic 
League, and the emperor had to carry out their wishes. But in the 
second, or Danish period of the war, the emperor had an army of his 
own which had gained the greatest successes. It was not Tilly but 
Wallenstein who had saved the eastern provinces and had driven 
the Danes from the north. And with Wallenstein politics rather 
than religion were the guiding motive. Protestants were admitted 
to his army and even to high command. Under his influence the 
most magnificent schemes were entertained at Vienna for the 
revival of the imperial supremacy over all hostile interests. But 
these were to the full as distasteful to the Cathelics as to the 
Protestants. The ideas of princely independence, always strong in 
Germany, and never more so than at the present moment, set them- 
selves in direct opposition to Ferdinand and his general. ‘The ill- 
feeling against Wallenstein was increased by the fact that he sought 
his own aggrandisement as well as that of the imperial authority. 


A.D. 1626-1629. WALLENSTEIN. 141 


After the conquest of Silesia, he had received the principality of 
Sagan, and afterwards he obtained from Ferdinand the investiture 
of Mecklenburg. This arbitrary interference»vith German territory, 
and the rise to equal rank with themselves of a Bohemian ad- 
venturer, aroused the greatest disaffection among the princes. The 
forced contributions for the imperial troops, and their oppressive 
conduct, were another great grievance. The Catholic electors 
combined to demand Wallenstein’s dismissal. But Ferdinand and 
his minister Eggenberg were in complete accord with the schemes 
of their general, and the attack on him failed. This set him free to 
continue his policy in Germany. 

His great object now was to revive the German maritime power 
in the northern seas, and thus to complete the humiliation of the 
Scandinavian kingdoms. In this he relied on the Hanseatic 
League, which still existed, though the new commercial routes had 
cut off nost of its trade. Already the Spaniards, anxious to deprive 
the Dutch of their commerce, had sent envoys to the Hansa pro- 
posing a commercial alliance on very advantageous terms. But the 
merchants refused to advance their interests at the expense of 
Protestantism. Wallenstein relied upon force instead of diplomacy, 
and determined to make himself master of the southern Baltic 
coast. His troops occupied Wismar and laid siege to Stralsund 
(1628), where the inhabitants offered a heroic resistance. The 
siege was of vast importance. Had the town fallen, Germany 
would have been completely at’ the emperor’s feet. Sweden and 
Denmark would have been excluded from further interference. 
Wallenstein strained every nerve to take Stralsund, but was foiled 
by the want of a fleet, which left the sea open to his eneraies. In 
the face of the danger of imperial supremacy on the Baltic, 
Gustavus Adolphus gave up his old rivalry with Denmark and sent 
assistance to the besieged. Wallenstein sent to beg troops from 
Tilly, who referred the matter to his employers, the princes of the 
Catholic League. They were unwilling even to ensure the fall of 
Protestantism if they thereby endangered their own liberties, and 
the request was refused. After six months Wallenstein was 
compelled to raise the siege and thus experienced his first reverse. 
This encouraged Christian IV. to attempt another landing in 
Germany. But Wallenstein was still too strong in the open field, 
and forced him to conclude the treaty of Liibeck (1629). By this 
he received back his conquered territories, but in return gave up all 
claims to his son’s bishoprics and promised to ahkstain from further 
interference in German affairs. < 

§14. During the years 1627-9 the House of Hapsburg seemed to be 
as powerful in Europe as it had been even under Charles V. The 


142 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. x. 


division into two branches had weakened it for a time, but now the 
Austrian and Spanish lines were in the closest union. Philip IV. 
and his minister, Olivarez, were Ferdinand II.’s most ardent sup- 
porters. In Germany the emperor seemed supreme, and an 
opportunity now occurred of reviving his rule in Italy. The death 
of Vincenzo Gonzaga, the duke of Mantua, in 1627, left as the next 
heir a Frenchman, the duke of Nevers. But both Spain and 
Austria dreaded the establishment of French influence in Italy. 
Mantua was declared to be an escheated imperial fief, and was 
occupied by Spanish troops. But again, as in 1623, the rise of the 
Hapsburg power excited the greatest opposition in Europe. The 
lesser Italian states appealed to France; and Richelieu, as soon as 
he had crushed the Huguenots by the capture of La Rochelle 
(1628), led troops into Italy which furced the Spaniards to raise the 
siege of Casale (1629). In the next year, 1630, imperialist troops 
joined the Spaniards in Mantua. But Richelieu again crossed the 
Alps, made himself master of Piedmont, and again raised the siege 
of Casale, though he was not strong enough to take Mantua. He 
now determined to make a diversion on the side of Germany by 
calling in Gustavus Adolphus. He negotiated a peace between 
Sweden and Poland, and thus set the king’s hands free. 

At the same time hostility to the emperor appeared in Germany 
itself. .'The imperial supremacy was based on the army raised by 
Wallenstein, and this army and its leader were the objects-of bitter 
hatred to all German princes. The four Catholic electors, with 
Maximilian of Bavaria at their head, renewed their demand for 
Wallenstein’s dismissal. At the same time they wished to utilise 
the victory which he had won for the advantage of their religion. + 
They induced Ferdinand to issue the Edict of Restitution (March 6, 
1629), by which all ecclesiastical property that had been secularised 
since the peace of Passau was to be restored to the Catholic church. 
The measure was entirely opposed to the policy of Wallenstein, 
who wished to subordinate all religious questions to his grand 
object, the establishment of imperial supremacy. It roused the 
bitterest discontent among the Protestants, even those who had 
hitherto been neutral, and thus gave great advantages to the 
Swedish king. | 

It was obvious that for once the interests of the Austro-Spanish 
house and those of Catholicism were at variance. The electors were 
ready to throw themselves on the side of France rather than submit 
to any diminution.of their territorial independence. This offered a 
great opening for Richelieu’s intrigues. While on the one hand he 
was urging Gustavus Adolphus to espouse the Protestant cause, on 
the other he was encouraging the extreme Catholics in their 


A.D. 1630. GUSTAVUS ADOLPHUS. 143 


opposition to the emperor. His right-hand man, the Capuchin 
Tather Joseph, played an important part in the meeting at Ratisbon 
in 1680, where the attack on Wallenstein was vigorously renewed. 

Ferdinand, who hoped by conciliating the princes to procure his 
son's election as King of the Romans, at last gave way, and the 
great general went into temporary retirement. The command of 
his army was transferred to Tilly. Thus at the very moment of its 
greatest triumph, the imperial authority was once more over- 
shadowed by the power of the League, from which it had attempted 
to free itself, 

§ 15. At this all-important conjuncture Gustavus Adolphus landed 
at Usedom without opposition. He forced the aged duke of Pome- 
rania to make an alliance with him, and made himself master of the 
southern Baltic coast. Tilly failed in an attempt to oppose his 
progress and was compelled to retire to the Elbe. The only great 
obstacle in Gustavus’ way was the extreme unwillingness of the 
German princes to join bim. A few of the lesser princes, who had 
more to gain than to lose appeared in his camp, prominent among 
whom was Bernhard of Saxe-Weimar, a representative of the 
Ernestine line of Saxony, But the great Lutheran leaders, John 
George of Saxony and George William of Brandenburg, the latter of 
whom was the Swedish king’s brother-in-law, adhered obstinately 
to their feeble and ruinous neutrality. ‘They summoned a Protestant 
conference at Leipzig, where they demanded once more the 
withdrawal of the Edict of Restitution. But they took no steps 
to enforce their demand, which was unhesitatingly refused. The 
persecution of the Protestants was continued. Magdeburg, which 
had refused to accept the edict, was vigorously besieged. '‘I'o 
strengthen his forces Ferdinand concluded the treaty of Cherasco 
(1631) with France, by which the duke of Nevers obtained Mantua, 
and the imperial troops were enabled to quit Italy. Gustavus 
Adolphus was above all things anxious to advance to the relief of 
Magdeburg, But he dared not stir southwards till he had gained 
over Saxony and Brandenburg, and they rejected all his offers, Tilly 
stormed the devoted town, and it was sacked with a cruelty which 
stands out even among the atrocities of the Thirty Years’ War. 
Thus the Catholics gained a new victory, but it was their last. 
Gustavus advanced to Berlin, and the Swedish troops and cannon 
forced his vacillating brother-in-law into an alliance, as security for 
which two important fortresses were ceded. But John George of 
Saxony was harder to deal with, and Gustavus might have heen 
foiled but for the imprudent conduct of the emperor himself. Tilly 
received orders to invade Saxony and to force the elector to disarm 
his troops. ‘This ungrateful treatment was too much for the most 


144 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. x. 


peace-loving prince. John George threw himself into the arms of 
the Swedes and concluded an offensive and defensive alliance with 
them. A combined army marched to attack Tilly and met him in 
the great battle of Breitenfeld. The untrained Saxons were put to 
flight, but the Swedes held their ground and completely routed the 
imperial troops. 

The defeat undid at one blow all that the Catholics had hitherto 
gained. ‘The enforcement of the Edict of Restitution in northern 
Germany became impossible. And Gustavus did not remain 
content with this success. ‘The Saxon army was sent into 
Bohemia, where it occupied Prague without opposition, but did 
nothing further. The king himself undertook a marvellous march 
against the ecclesiastical principalities of south-western Germany. 
Passing through Thuringia he reached the Main and the Rhine. 
One after another Wiirzburg, Bamberg, even Mainz fell into his 
hands. Everywhere the Catholics fled before him, and the work of 
the Counter-Reformation was undone. ‘The exiled elector Palatine 
joined him and might have recovered his territories, but that his 
bigotry forbade him to promise the least toleration to the Catholics. 
It was in vain that French diplomacy, astounded and dismayed at 
the Swedish successes, sought to make peace between them and the 
League, so as to direct ail hostility against the house of Hapsburg. 
Gustavus Adolphus refused to become the tool of Richelieu. Eariy 
in 1682 he turned eastwards to attack Bavaria, the head-quarters of 
Catholicism. Nuremberg welcomed him with effusive demonstra- 
tions. ‘Tilly, who had re-formed his army, tried to dispute the 
passage of the Lech, but was again defeated and himself slain. 
Gustavus entered Munich, and the whole of Bavaria, except Ingol- 
- stadt, lay at his feet. 

§ 16. Thus was Ferdinand II. rewarded for his concessions to the 
Catholics in 1630. For their sake he had sacrificed Wallenstein, 
and resigned the prospect of imperial absolutism both in Italy and 
Germany. And now his allies had proved unable to protect either 
their religion or themselves. Protestantism was triumphant, and 
the emperor’s hereditary territories were only spared by the invincible 
moderation of the elector of Saxony. In these circumstances it was 
natural that he should turn again to his old general who had before 
rendered him such important service. During his enforced retire- 
ment Wallenstein had by no means lost sight of politics, though he 
regarded them with altered views. Stung with the ingratitude 
shown to him, he had made overtures to the Swedes, and had 
offered to drive the Hapsburgs into Italy. ‘The news of Breitenfeld 
filled Lim with joy. When these schemes failed, he still kept up a 
close connection with the Saxons, whose commander, Arnim, was his 


A.D, 1632. GUSTAVUS AND WALLENSTEIN. 145 


old companion in arms. Now came the imperial offer to restore 
him to his old command. He accepted on conditions which were 
to give him both military and political independence, and to secure 
him from the possibility of another abrupt dismissal. His name alone 
was sufficient to create an army. But Wallenstein entered upon his 
second command with a very different policy to that which had 
cuided him before. He was no longer the devoted champion of 
imperial supremacy. He was determined not to become the tool 
of the League or of the Catholic party at Vienna. He would have 
nothing to do with the Catholic reaction. Through his connexion 
with Saxony he hoped to establish a religious compromise, if 
necessary by force; he would. exclude all foreigners, Swedes, 
Frenchmen, even Spaniards, from interference in Germany: and 
lastly, he would found a great principality for himself. Wallenstein 
is no longér an Austrian general but an independent potentate. 
His first act was to drive the Saxons from Bohemia, and he 
endeavoured to force a peace on the elector. But John George had 
some honourable feeling, and refused to break his promise to the 
Swedes. ~ 

The news of Wallenstein’s movements reached Gustavus Adolphus 
as he was trying by organisation to secure some permanent result 
of his successes. For himself he wished to obtain Pomerania, 
which would give him absolute control of the Baltic, and a position 
of a prince of the empire. In this latter capacity he wished to 
place himself at the head of a new Protestant union, a corpus 
evangelicorum, which was to have an internal constitution, and 
which might defend itself against all attacks. It is possible that 
he looked forward to a time when a Protestant majority of the 
electors might place the imperial crown on his own head, But in 
all his schemes he had to contend with the political incapacity of 
the Germans, and their incurable jealousy of himself as a foreigner. 
Saxony was especially reluctant to submit to Swedish headship. 
And now Gustavus had to stand on the defensive, for Wallenstein 
had marched from Bohemia against Nuremberg. 'The king threw 
himself into the town, and held out till the arrival of reinforce- 
ments made him strong enough to meet the enemy. But Wallenstein 
refused a battle, and an attack on his strong intrenchments was 
repulsed with loss. For once Gustavus had to retreat unsuccessful. 
Instead of pursuing him, Wallenstein broke up his camp and in- 
vaded Saxony, hoping to compel the elector to desert the Swedes. 
Gustavus had to give up the plan of a direct march on Vienna, 
und advanced to assist his ally. At Liitzen the two great generals 
were again face to face. An obstinate battle ended in favour of 
the Swedes, but Gustavus fell a victim to his personal rashness, 

Q* 


146 MODERN EUROPE. Crap. x. 


and his loss was far more disastrous than a defeat could have 
been. 

The death of Gustavus Adolphus was fatal to the last chance 
of forming a Protestant union in Germany. If Saxony had 
objected to the Swedish king, it was not likely to submit to the 
influence of the chancellor Oxenstiern, who undertook the manage- 
ment of affairs during the minority of queen Christina. All he 
could do was to form the League of Heilbronn among the south 
German states, the nearest approach that was ever made to the 
projected corpus evangelicorum. ‘The great object of Swedish 
diplomacy was to ivduce the north-German states to join the 
League, but it proved impossible. And the death of the king was 
a terrible disaster from a military, as well as from a political point 
of view. Numerous able leaders had been trained under his eye, 
notably, Bernhard of Saxe-Weimar, Horn, Baner, 'Torstenson, and 
others. But the requisite unity was gone; and what was worse, 
the old discipline could no longer be maintained. The Swedes, 
hitherto remarkable for their temperate conduct, were henceforth 
as great a scourge to Germany as had been the troops of Mansfeld 
or Tilly. 

In spite of all this, the imperialist cause did not reap any 
immediate advantage from Gustavus’ death. The alliance between 
France and Sweden was renewed, and French influence was 
gradually extending itself, though Richelieu had not yet declared 
war against either Austria or Spain. The elector of Trier had 
admitted a French garrison into Ehrenbreitstcin, which commanded 
the Rhine and Moselle. The duke of Lorraine, a partisan of Spain, 
had been driven from his territories, whence the French obviously 
threatened Alsace. Bernhard of Saxe-Weimar maintained the 
Swedish preponderance in Franconia and Bavaria, and before the 
end of 1633 took Ratisbon. His object was to restore the Ernestine 
line to its old dignity, and he demanded and obtained from Oxenstiern 
the grant of the bishoprics of Bamberg and Wurzburg, which were 
to be made into the duchy of Franconia. The assumption by a 
Swedish noble of the right to dispose of German territories, 
increased the alienation of Saxony, Brandenburg, and other states. 

§ 17. Meanwhile all eyes were fixed on Wallenstein; who, after 
Liitzen, had retired to Bohemia, where he occupied a strong 
defensive position, and could advance at will either to the north 
or south. He was still pursuing his favourite scheme, to come to 
terms with Saxony as the basis of a general peace. He was 
prepared to revoke the Edict of Restitution altogether. At one time 
a treaty was on the verge of conclusion, but it was doubtful 
how far Wallenstein could insist on his policy at Vienna. Thus 


Clee ts eee ee eee ee ae ee 


—— le 


A.D. 1632-1634. DEATH OF WALLENSTEIN. 147 


disappointed, he took the offensive, drove the Swedes from Silesia, 
and threatened Saxony and Brandenburg. But the fall of Ratisbon 
checked his advance, and he returned to Bohemia, refusing to 
assist the elector of Bavaria, towards whom he felt no good will. 
His conduct, and especially his policy of peace and religious com- 
promise, had aroused the greatest antipathy among the Catholic 
powers. <A strong party was formed against at him at Vienna, 
headed by the emperor’s confessor. The Spanish influence, which 
had once supported him, was now hostile. He had proposed to 
obtain the Palatinate fur himself, but the Spaniards were afraid of 
a strong power in that neighbourhood. And he had shown himself 
resolutely hostile to all attempts of Spain to secure a territorial 
connexion between Italy and the Netherlands. All the hostile 
influences combined to sow discord between the emperor and his 
general. Ferdinand was naturally jealous of the independent 
attitude of Wallenstein, and was induced to believe that he aimed 
at the Bohemian crown. It was determined to get rid of so in- 
convenient a servant. Many of Wallenstein’s chief officers were 
induced to desert him. It was in vain that he did all in his power 
to secure the allegiance of his army. The officers signed all kinds 
of promises, but reserved their fealty to the emperor. In an 
unlucky moment Wallenstein moved from Pilsen, where the 
garrison were devoted to him, to Eger. There his two chief 
supporters were killed at a banquet by Scotch and _ Irish 
mercenaries, and the murderers completed their work by assas- 
sinating Wallenstein in his bedroom. Thus perished a leader 
whose character will always be variously interpreted, but who 
ranks with Richelien and Gustavus Adolphus as one of the great 
men of the age. 

The House of Hapsburg reaped undeserved advantages from 
Wallenstein’s death. His army passed under the command of the 
emperor's son, Ferdinand, king cf Hungary. It was joinel by 
the Spanish troops from Italy, which Wallenstein had tried to 
exclude. ‘Thus strengthened it advanced to the relief of Bavaria, 
where the troops of the Heilbronn League were wholly inferior. 
At Nordlingen, Bernhard of Saxe-Weimar induced his cautious 
colleague Horn to risk a battle, in which they were wholly routed 
and Horn taken prisoner (September, 1634). . Nordlingen did for 
the Catholics of the south what Breitenfeld had done for the 
Protestarts of the north. The work of Gustavus was undone, and 
almost the whole of Southern Germany fell into the hands of the 
imperialists, 

The first great result of the battle of Nordlingen was to throw 
the defeated Protestants into the arms of France. Richelieu’s 


148 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. x. 


object was at last obtained, and French influence teuds to supplant 
that of Sweden. Oxenstiern was forced to cede the fortresses of 
Elsass to France, and thus to commence that dismemberment of 
the empire, which Gustavus had hoped to avoid. War between 
France and Spain was declared in 1635. Another great result of 
the battle was the treaty of Prague. John George of Saxony was 
more than ever averse to the war. If he had been jealous of the 
Swedes, he was far more so of the French. The negotiations which 
Wallenstein’s death had interrupted, were resumed. Ferdinand 
had learnt some wisdom from adversity, and was willing to give 
up in fact, though not in word, the Edict of Restitution. The year 
1627 was to rej)lace 1552. All bishoprics held by Protestants at 


that date were to remain in their hands. ‘The ‘Calvinists were | 


excluded from the treaty, which could not therefore be permanently 
satisfactory. Such as it was, however, it was accepted by most of 
the Protestant states, and the great conflict might have ended in 
1635, but for the foreign interests that had become involved in it. 

§ 18. Henceforth the war ceases to be German ; and becomes a mere 
struggle of French and Swedes against Austria and Spain which 
is fought out on German soil. No regard for German interests is 
displayed by any of the combatants after the death of Gustavus 
Adolphus. The Swedes fight for compensation in the shape of 
Pomerania, the French for the Rhine frontier. As soon as the 
empire can be forced to gratify these claims, the war may come to 
an end. ‘There is henceforth a double military centre; in the 
north the Swedes fight against Saxony and occasionally invade 
the Austrian territories under the successive command of Baner, 
Torstenson and Wrangel, all leaders of eminent ability. In the south- 
west Bernhard of Saxe-Weimar enters into the service of France, 
and carries on a stubborn contest with Austrians and Spaniards 
for Elsass and the Rhine country. At first the imperialists had the 
upper hand, and the expulsion of the foreigners from Germany 
seemed imminent. The Swedes were gradually driven back towards 
the Baltic and in 1636 Oxenstiern retired to Sweden. In the south 
the French were equally unsuccessful. Not only were they driven 
back from the Rhine, and their ally the elector of Trier taken 
prisoner, but the enemy even entered France and threatened Paris. 
Bat now, as under Francis I., the defensive strength of France 
showed itself invincible, and the invaders retired. In October, 1636, 
Baner recovered some of the lost ground for Sweden by a victory at 
Wittstock. f 

At the beginning of the next year, Ferdinand IJ. died. On lum 
more than on any other individual, rests the responsibility for a 
war which was perhaps in some form or other inevitable. He was 


a eee - 


A.v. 1635-1645. LAST YEARS OF THE WAR. 149 


succeeded both in the empire and in his hereditary territories by 
his son Ferdinand IJ1., a prince cf far less capacity than his father. 
In the campaign of this year all parties seemed exhausted by their 
previous efforts. But in 1638 Bernhard of Saxe-Weimar by a sudden 
attack seized the chief fortresses of Elsass, and thus obtained a firm 
stronghold fer the enemies of the house of Hapsburg. Richelieu 
wished to treat the conquered land as a French province, but 
Bernhard, with some lingering regard for the unity of the empire, 
refused to consent to its dismemberment. His plan was to make 
Elsass into a duchy for himself, and having thus established an 
independent position, to resume the policy of Wallenstein, and force 
a peace on the combatants. But his sudden death in 1639 put an 
end to his schemes and gave the greatest advantages to France. 
Bernhard’s army and with it Elsass passed into French hands. 

Meanwhile Baner in the north had invaded Bohemia without any 
permanent success. In 1640, his forces, combined with the French 
made a bold attack in winter on Ratisbon, where the emperor was 
holding a diet. The town was saved by the flood caused by a 
sudden thaw, and Baner was forced to retreat to Saxony. In 1641 
he died, and the command passed to Torstenson. He concluded a 
truce with Brandenburg, where the new elector Frederick William 
gave up that policy of dependence on the Hapsburgs which his 
father had pursued in conjunction with Saxony, This treaty secured 
the position of the Swedes in northern Germany. 

The death of Richelieu in December, 1642, followed by that of his 
master Louis XIIJ., made no change in the policy of France, which 
was now directed by the cardinal’s pupil, Mazarin Hitherto the 
French troops had done nothing but hold their own, but they had 
gradually become inured to war and were now to acquire fame under 
worthy commanders. The brilliant Condé, devoid of the higher 
qualities of a general and prodigal of his soldiers’ lives, had a genius 
for fighting battles. ‘lurenne, a far greater strategist, was able to 
supply the defects of his more dashing rival. In 1643 Conde won 
the first of a series of victories over the Spaniards at Rocroy, and 
took Thionville. In the next year a three days’ battle at Freiburg 
ended in the retreat of the imperialists. A second battle of Nordlingen 
in 1645 cost an enormous number of lives, and was only converted 
into a French victory by the death of the hostile commander, Mercy. 
In the same year Torstenson had invaded Bohemia and had won a 
great victory at Jankow. ‘Thence he advanced against Vienna, but 
was compelled to retreat, and soon after resigned -the command to 
Wrangel. 

§ 19. It was evident that no great advantage was to be gained from 
the continuance of a war of which all parties were weary. Already in 


150 MODERN EUROPE. Cuar. x. 


1643 the diplomatists had met in Westphalia to negotiate a peace. 
At Osnabriick the emperor treated with Sweden and the Protestant 
states, at Miinster with France and the Catholics. The great 
difficulty was the emperor’s disinclination to dismember the Haps- 


‘burg territories by the cession of Alsace. Maximilian of Bavaria, 


who cared little for Hapsburg interests, was more desirous of inducing 
Trance to consent to his retention of the Upper Palatinate. In 
these circumstances it was determined by a vigorous movement to 
detach Bavaria from the imperial alllance. Saxony had already 
made a truce with the Swedes, and in 1646 Turenne, by a brilliant 
manceuvre, passed the hostile army, joined Wrangel, and deliberately 
laid waste the Bavarian territory. Maximilian had to conclude a 
truce, which was no sooner made than broken. But the enemy was 
upon him again, and he was completeiy defeated at Zusmarshausen 
(May, 1648). Ferdinand III., unable to carry on the war by himself, 


was compelled at last to come to terms. ‘lhe various treaties were 


arranged at Osnabriick and Minster, but are usually and conveniently 
classed together as the peace of Westphalia. 

The religious settlement effected by the treaty foilowed the lines 
laid down at Passau and Augsburg. The one important difference 
was that Calvinism at last obtained formal recognition. ‘The great 
question as to church property was arranged by the selection of a 
fresh date, 1624. Benefices were to remain in the hands of members 
of that creed to which they belonged in that year. This secured to 
the Protestants greater advantages than the treaty of Prague had done. 
To secure an impartial administration of justice the Imperial Chamber 
was to be composed of Protestants and Catholics in equal numbers. 
‘The territorial changes sanctioned by the treaty were of considerable 
importance. Sweden obtained the bishoprics of Bremen and Verden 
and the greater part of Pomerania, and thus secured that command 
of the Baltic which had been so great an object of Gustavus Adolphus. 
The rest of Pomerania went to Brandenburg, which had legal claims 
on the whole. In compensation for these claims the elector received 
the bishoprics of Magdeburg, Halberstadt and Minden. Maximilian 
of Bavaria retained the Upper Palatinate and his electoral dignity. 
The Lower Palatinate was restored to Charles Lewis, son of the 
deposed Frederic V., for whom an eighth electorate was created. 
France obtained the legal cession of Metz, Toul and Verdun, which 
had been seized in 1552 by Henry IIL. and also retained Austrian 
Elsass, with the exception of Strasburg and the immediate vassals of 
the empire. Switzerland was declared formally separated from the 
empire. At the same time {Spain recognised the independence of 
the Dutch. Between France and Spain it was found impossible to 
arrange terms, and the war was continued till 1658. 


‘ 
‘e 
A. 
& 
S 

Fy 
£ 


A.D. 1648. PEACE OF WESTPHALIA. 151 


The great result of the Thirty Years’ War, and of the religious 
differences from which it had arisen, was the complete annihilation 
of German unity. The name of the empire was retained, but it 
had no longer any practical reality. Ferdinand II. had identified 
the imperial authority with the suppression of Protestantism. Pro- 
testantism survived the danger, and the result was the destruction of 
the authority which had menaced it. Germany became a loose 
federation in which the territorial princes were all-powerful. The 
right to determine the religion of their subjects, which had been 
admitted in the peace of Augsburg, was confirmed in that of West- 
phalia. ‘The imperial diet continued its meetings, but it became a 
congress of plenipotentiaries. One great blessing the peace brought 
with it, the absolute termination of those religious quarrels which 
had produced such havoc and misery, and which were ended less 
by agreement than by exhaustion. 


152 MODERN EUROPE.. 


‘CHAPTER XI. 


FRANCE UNDER RICHELIEU AND MAZARIN. 


§ 1. Regency of Mary de Medici; change of foreign policy ; Concini; 
revolts of the nobles; States-General of 1614; fall of Concini and end 
of the regency. § 2. Huguenot revolts; -death of Luynes; peace of 
Montpellier. § 3. Richelieu becomes minister; second revolt of the 
Huguenots; its suppression; conspiracy against Richelieu; domestic 
reforms. § 4. Huguenots again revolt; siege of La Rochelle. § 5. 
Opposition to Richelieu; the day of Dupes; exile of Mary de Medici 
and Gaston of Orleans, § 6. Rising in Languedoc; execution of 
Montmorency ; Richelieu triumphs over his domestic enemies. § 7. 
Conspiracy of Cinq-Mars; death of Richelieu; character of his admini- 
stration; his foreign policy. § 8, Mazarin becomes minister; death of 
Louis XIJI.; regency of Anne of Austria; the Jmportants. § 9. 
Financial distress; the Parliament of Paris; opposition to the govern- 
ment. § 10. Arrest of Broussel; outbreak of the Fronde; attitude of 
the nobles; peace of Rueil. § 11. The second Fronde; victory of 
Mazarin; junction of the old and new Frondes; Condé’s triumph ; 
Turenne gained over by the Regent; civil war; collapse of the Fronde. 
§ 12. War with Spain; France gains the alliance of Cromwell ; treaty 
of the Pyrenees. § 13. Death of Mazarin ; his will. 


§ 1. On the death of Henry IV. (1610), France fell for fourteen 
years under the most worthless government that even that 
country had ever endured. As Louis XIII. was a minor, the 
regency was claimed by his mother, Mary de Medici, and her 
claim was sanctioned by the Parliament of Paris. She at once 
reversed her husband’s policy, deserted the Protestant allies of 
France, and concluded a close alliance with Spain. Louis XIII, 
was betrothed to Philip IIL’s daughter, Anne of Austria. The 
favour of the queen raised to power a native of her own Tuscany, 
Concini, who became marquis d’Ancre, and a marshal of France. 
Sully was driven into retirement. Concini’s rule excited the 
natural enmity of the great nobles, who had been kept down by 
the strong hand of Henry IV., but who hoped on his death to 
recover their independent power. ‘l‘hey found a leader in the Prince 
of Condé, the king’s cousin, who, as the nearest prince of the blood 
royal, considered that he had a just claim to the regency. A series 


A.D. 1610-1623. EARLY YEARS OF LOUIS XIII. 153 


of revolts ensued, all equally unimportant, because they involved 
no political principle. The objects of the nobles were purely selfish, 
and they could always be bought off with pensions, places and titles. 
As in the old war of the Public Weal, they put forth a flimsy 
claim to be the champions of popular privileges, and demanded 
the summons of the States-General. They met at Paris in 1614 
only to display once more the weakness arising from the jealousies 
among the three orders. They were dissolved without any result, 
and no other meeting of the States-General was held till 1789. 
The factious turbulence of ‘the nobles continued to harass and 
weaken the government till, in 1617, the king determined to take 
the reins into his own hands. He ordered Concini’s arrest, but the 
soldiers who executed the order shot him. His wife, the queen- 
mother’s attendant, was accused of sorcery, condemned and executed. 
This event only transferred the government to the king’s favourite, 
Luynes, who had suggested the attack on the late minister. Disorder 
was increased by the accession of Mary de Medici to the party of 
opposition. 
==‘ § 2. The one notable point in the selfish policy of the nobles had 
been their efforts, more successful than they deserved, to arouse the 
discontent of the Huguenots. 'The Edict of Nantes had secured to 
them not only religious toleration but also a large amount of 
political independence. They formed an inner state within the 
State. This was a real danger to the unity of France, and was 
certain to give rise to future evils. In 1620 the re-establishment 
of Catholicism in Béarn by the royal authority, together with the 
contemporary events in Germany, aroused the greatest apprehension 
among the Huguenots, and led France into a new religious war. 
A great assembly at La Rochelle determined ¢o resort to arms, 
A central organisation was formed and the Protestant districts were 
divided into circles under regular officers. The example of the 
Dutch had evidently great influence over their fellow Calvinists 
in France. The king confirmed the Edict of Nantes in order to 
reassure the moderate Huguenots, and then prepared to put down 
the revolt. Luynes undertook the reduction of Montauban, but 
was repulsed, and died soon afterwards of fever (December, 1621). 
But the central government was too strong for the rebels, and in 
1623 they were compelled to accept the treaty of Montpellier. By 
this the Edict of Nantes was confirmed, but all political meetings 
were prohibited, and only two towns of security were left, La 
Rochelle and Montauban. 
>The death of Luynes restored some of her former power to the 
queen-mother, and her influence brought into the ministry a man 
who was destined to alter the whole character of the reign. Armand 


154 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. x1. 


Duplessis de Richelieu, a member of an old family of Poitou, was 
born at Paris in 1585, he was made bishop of Lueon at an early 
age,and in the States-General of 1614 he appeared as an orator of 
the clergy; in 1623 he received the cardinal’s hat. Formerly a 
supporter of Congini, he now assumed an independent position, and 
from 1624 he may be regarded as the real ruler of France. During 
a ministry of eighteen years he had to contend with great difficulties, 
the open opposition of the great nobles, his own ill-health, and the 
feeble vacillation of the king. But he triumphed over all, and 
must be regarded as the greatest, though not the noblest, statesman 
I'rance has ever produced. The objects of his policy were simple 
and comprehensive; within France, the establishment of national 
union by the suppression of the factious nobles and of the political 
independence of the Huguenots; without France, the annihilation 
of the supremacy claimed by the Austro-Spanish power. His foreign 
policy, which was eminently successful, has been sufficiently considered 
in connexion with the Thirty Years’ War. It remains only to speak 
of his internal administration, which was of no less importance and 
success, but the merits of which are more open to question. 

While Richelieu’s attention was absorbed in Italian affairs and 
the question of the Valtelline, a second revolt of the Huguenots 
broke out in 1625 under Soubise and Rohan. Its cause was the 
alarm aroused in La Rochelle by the erection of a royal fort in the 
neighbourhood. ‘The war was mainly a naval one, and the defeat 
of the Huguenot fleet was followed by a treaty which renewed, 
that of Montpellier. But the revolt convinced the cardinal of the 
necessity of establishing perfect unity at home before embarking in 
extensive foreign projects. Deserting his allies, therefore, he con- 
cluded the treaty of Monzon and threw himself at once into 
domestic affairs. A. series of edicts in 1626 prohibited duelling, 
ordered the demolition of all fortresses which were not on the 
frontiers, and attacked the worst abuses that had sprung up under 
the government of grasping courtiers. These measures excited great 
discontent and gave rise to the first of a series of court intrigues 
against Richelieu. The intriguers found a useful instrument in the 
king’s brother, Gaston of Anjou, a weak and dissolute prince. He 
was induced by the count of Chalais, a young royal favourite, to 
refuse a marriage with Mademviselle de Montpensier, which the 
cardinal proposed. 'The duke of Vendome and his brother, two 
natural sons of Henry IV., a number of lords and ladies, and even 
the queen Anne of Austria, were concerned in a plot to depose 
Louis XIII, to give the crown to his brother and to assassinate 
Richelieu. But the cardinal’s vigilance detected the plot, and his 


vengeance was unsparing. Chalais was arrested, triedand executed. 


A.D. 1624—1629. RICHELIEU, 155 


The duke of Vendome with a crowd of nobles was sent into exile, 
Gaston, who made a full confession, was left unpunished, but had 
to marry Mademoiselle de Montpensier and was made duke of Orleans. 
Even the young queen was severely reprimanded, and was 
henceforth regarded by her husband with jealousy and suspicion. 
Having thus crushed sedition for a time, Richelieu summoned 
an assembly of notables, before which he developed his plans 
for administrative reform. ‘lhe expenditure amounted to thirty- 
six millions, and the revenue only to sixteen. ‘This was to 
be remedied by the recovery of domain-right, the reduction of the 
royal household, and the abolition of the old offices of constable and 
admiral. Steps were to be taken for the raising of a navy, and pro- 
tective measures adopted for the development of French commerce. 
This assembly is important as showing that Richelieu had realiy 
some consideration for the popular welfare, and that in more for- 
tunate times he might have obtained fame as a reformer. But the 
constant succession of wars and conspiracies absorbed his attention, 
and increased the expenditure. Most of his schemes were left to be 
carried out by his successors. 

$4. In 1627 the alliance between England and France was broken 
off by a dispute about Henriett. Maria’s marriage treaty, and, as 
rumour declared, by Buckingham’s passion for Anne of Austria. 
The prospect of English assistance aroused a new revolt in La 
Rochelle, and the restless Rohan again took up arms in Languedoc. 
This danger called forth all the cardinal’s energies. The English 
fleet, which had been led by Buckingham against the island of Rhé, 
was repulsed, and Richelieu determined to crush Huguenot dis- 
affection once for all by the reduction of La Rochelle. ‘The great 
difficulty in the way of a blockade was that the beseiged commanded 
the approach by sea. ‘To put an end to this Richelieu determined 
to build a huge mole across the mouth of the harbour. All 
attempts to interrupt or destroy the work were foiled. At last 
the town, after a heroic resistance, was starved into submission 
(28 October, 1628), and received fairly favourable terms, though its 
walls and fortifications were demolished. ‘Thus a great step was 
made towards centralisation. No other French city ventured to 
oppose the monarchy until the Revolution, ‘The assassination of 
Buckingham by Felton removed the chief obstacle to peace with 
England, which was concluded in 1629. Richelieu was now free to 
turn to Languedoc, where the rising was put down and a -treaty 
concluded at Alais. The Huguenots retained their religious liberty ~ 
and their rights as citizens, but they lost that political independence 
which was dangerous to the unity of the kingdom. ‘Their towns of 
security were taken away, and they became ordinary subjects of the 


156 MODERN EUROPE. OHAP. XI. 


crown. It is evident that Richelieu, though a cardinal, was 
imbued with none of the fanaticism of the Catholic reaction. “He 
was anxious to conciliate the Huguenots after rendering them 
harmless, and he had no desire to drive them to despair. 

§ 5. The anti-Spanish policy which Richelieu so conspicuously 
manifested in 1629 in the affair of the Mantuan succession, aroused 
against him a more formidable enemy than he had yet encountered. 
This was the queen-mother, Mary de Medici. She regarded the 
cardinal as her own creature, and was astounded and enraged when 
he acquired an independent influence over the king which threatened 
to exclude her from all control over the government. She there- 
fore allied herself with the opposition party and determined to 
overthrow the minister. His place was to be taken by the two 
Marillacs, one of whom held the seals and the other was a marshal 
with the army now in Italy. By coarse violence she triumphed 
over her son’s weakness and induced him to sign an order entrust- 
ing supreme authority to Marshal Marillac and removing the other 
commanders who were Richelieu’s friends. All Paris exulted in 
the minister’s fall, and the political world crowded to Mary’s recep- 
tion at the Luxemburg, Even Richelieu himself believed for a 
moment that all was lost. But the queen-mother, with fatal con- 
fidence; had allowed Louis XIII. to escape from her presence to 
Versailles. There Richelieu visited him and at once recovered his 
old influence. The next day a new order was sent to Italy for 
Marillac’s arrest. The Parisians, astonished at this sudden reversal 
of anticipations, called it “the day of Dupes.” Mary de Medici 
saw all her schemes ruined and became more and more embittered 
against the author of her humiliation. The cardinal spared no 
pains to gain over Gaston of Orleans, the worthless heir to the 
throne. But the mother’s influence prevailed over her younger 
and favourite son. He renounced all friendship towards the cardinal 
and retired to Orleans. Richelieu now determined by a skilful 
_manceuvre to rid himself of so constant a source of danger as the 
the queen-mother’s presence in Paris. The court was suddenly 
removed to Compiegne. Mary, mindful of her recent error, at once 
followed her son. But Louis and Richelieu rode back to Paris, 
whence the former wrote to his mother forbidding her return and 
offering her the government of Anjou. ‘This great success being 
gained, steps were taken to reduce Orleans. Gaston had no means 
of resistance, and fled to Charles III. of Lorraine, who was the ally 
of Spain against France, and whose sister he secretly married. Soon 
afterwards Mary de Medici, who had refused the proffered governor- 
ship, escaped across the frontier to Brussels, where she was welcomed 
by the Spaniards. At the same time the duke of Guise, governor 


A.D. 1629-1632. PLOTS AGAINST RICHELIEU. 157 


of Provence, who had been involved in the oppositicn to Richelieu, 
found it prudent to retire from France, and ultimately died in exile 
in 1640. 

§ 6. Although the flight of his enemies was a great triumph for 
Richelieu he was still by no means secure. The House of Hapsburg 
was profoundly interested in the plots for his destruction. Spanish 
influence had been at the bottom of the recent intrigues, and now 
the exiles relied upon Spanish money and troops to effect their 
return. There was no patriotism in either Mary de Medici or 
Gaston. But for the bold march of Gustavus Adolphus upon the 
Rhine it is possible that France might have been exposed to a 
foreign invasion. ‘The Swedish successes were fatal to the hopes 
of the exiles, but they determined to do what they could with 
the help of internal discontent. The provinces, and especially 
the provincial governors, were alienated by Richelieu’s policy of 
centralisation, which threatened their ancient privileges. Of all the 
provinces Languedoc had enjoyed the greatest independence, and 
moreover, some of the Huguenot disaffection still survived in its 
old stronghold. Montmorency, who was now governor of Languedoc, 
had formerly been a supporter of the cardinal’s, but was induced 
to join in a scheme for his overthrow. He received Gaston of 
Orleans into the province and headed a rebeilion. Richelieu at 
once despatched a force against him under Schomberg. At the 
battle of Castelnaudari, Montmorency was wounded by a musket- 
bullet and taken prisoner. Gaston had to submit, and as usual 
received favourable terms. ‘The rebellious province was also treated 
with politic leniency. But Richelieu felt it necessary to make some 
example of the danger of revolt. At the beginning of the troubles 
Marshal Marillac had been brought before a special commission on a 
charge of peculation, condemned and executed. <A similar fate 
befell Montmorency, who was tried by the Parliament of Toulouse 
and sentenced to death. Strenuous efforts were made to secure a 
royal pardon, but Richelieu kept the king firm, and the sentence 
was carried out. The last of a family famous in the history of 
France perished on the scaffold (October, 1632). Thus Richelieu 
advanced the French monarchy by a policy at once consistent and 
ruthless. 

Gaston of Orleans, enraged at the death of Montmorency, again 
retired to Brussels and resumed his connection with Spain. Riche- 
lieu, who after the death of Gustavus Adolphus became more deeply 
involved in European politics, was extremely anxious to deprive 
the Spaniards of the advantage which they had derived from their 
hold over the heir of the French throne. The great difficulty was 
to induce Gaston to return without his mother, whom Richelieu 


158 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. XI. 


wished to keep as far as possible from court. At last this was 
accomplished, and the duke of Orleans was reconciled to his brother 
and the cardinal. His marriage with Margaret of Lorraine was 
declared null by the Parliament of Paris, and as the pope refused 
to confirm this, the requisite ecclesiastical authority was obtained 
from an assembly of Gallican clergy. Richelieu’s triumph over his 
domestic enemies was completed by the birth of a son to Anne of 
Austria, after twenty-two years of married life. This at once 
deprived the untrustworthy Gaston of his political importance. 
About the same time Mary de Medici was forced to leave Flanders, 
and found refuge with her daughter in England. Richelieu was 
now all-powerful in France. ‘The great European war in which he 
was engaged strengtheued his control over the feeble mind of Louis 
XI. and did much to create a national spirit in the. French 
people. A marvellous system of espionage enabled Richelieu to 
detect and crush all hostile intrigues. 

§ 7. It was not till towards the close of his life that Richelieu’s 
authority was again seriously threatened. In 1641 the count of 
Soissons, imbued with the old jealousy of the nobles against the 
minister, collected a number of exiles at the frontier-fortress of 
Sedan. The royal troops which were despatched against them 
were routed, but Soissons was killed by a pistol-bullet while heading 
the pursuit. His followers came to terms and laid down their arms. 
More formidable was a conspiracy at court. Louis XIII., weaker 
than ever in his old age, had fallen under the influence of a favourite, 
Cinq-Mars, whom Richelieu himself had introduced. The empty- 
headed but ambitious’ youth conceived the project of supplanting 
the great minister. He had opened relations with Soissons and was 
undismayed by the death of his ally. Louis XIII. had never loved 
the cardinal, whose intellect had so long dominated his own, and 
who had learnt to lecture his royal pupil with scanty respect. The 
king lent an ear to the accusations which the favourite showered 
freely against the presumption and arrogance of the minister. 
Richelieu was already suffering from the illness which proved 
mortal, and was unable to follow his master. His overthrow 
seemed assured, when he fortunately discovered a treasonable inter- 
course of Cing-Mars with Spain. Louis had already learnt that he 
could not do without the servant on whom he had so long relied. 
He was convinced of the treachery of his favourite, who was arrested 
with his confidant, de Thou, the son of the historian. Gaston of 
Orleans, who had been involved in the conspiracy against his old 
enemy, was induced to betray his comrades when their cause was 
seen to be hopeless. Richelieu was as implacable as ever in his old 
age, Cinq-Mars and de Thou were tried and executed. This was 


A.D. 1642. DEATH OF RICHELIEU. 159 


the cardinal’s last triumph. On 4th December, 1642, he dicd, at the 
age of fifty-eight. 

Richelieu will live for ever in French history as the creator of 
absolute power in France, as thefpunder of that system of govern- 
ment which became an abuse mt hands of his successors and 
was overthrown by the Revolution, It is not true that he was 
entirely regardless of the interests of the subject people. It was 
only the constant pressure of foreign wars and of internal dissensions 
that prevented his carrying through reforms which would have 
been of the utmost benefit to France. But it is true that he 
refused to admit the people to any share in their own government. 
The States-General he never summoned at all. Provincial liberties 
were crushed by the appointment of Intendants, the agents of the 
central power. Judicial institutions were made subservient to the 
monarchy. ‘The most ancient and powerful of them, the Parliament 
of Paris, was constantly humiliated by the minister. Constitu- 
tional pedants have made these facts the foundation of their 
gravest charge against Richelieu. But it must be remembered that 
no statesman, however great, can free himself from the influences 
of past history. Richelieu worked, as he could hardly have helped 
doing, on the lines laid down by the greatest of preceding rulers, 
by Louis XI., Francis I. and Henry IV. The French people in the 
seventeenth century were incapable of constitutional government, 
they did not even desire it. A strong central power was needed to 
create the nation. But for Richelieu neither the glories of Louis 
XIV. nor the reforms of Colbert would have been possible. One 
great service he undoubtedly rendered, the reduction to political 
nullity of a greedy and degenerate noble class, and this has won for 
him the praise even of revolutionists whom he would have abhorred. 
The means which he adopted for this end were creditable to his 
courage if not to his heart. His vengeance was ever directed 
against the great and powerful; he never condescended to punish 
their ignorant accomplices. But in pursuit of vengeance he too 
often transgressed the spirit if not the letter of the law, and he 
showed a personal animosity which excited natural unpopularity. 
The execution of Marillac for an offence of which hardly any official 
was guiltless, remains a stain on his administration... Richelieu 
himself maintained even on his death-bed that he had ho enemies 
save those of the state. Contemporaries did not believe this, nor 
will posterity. 

Richeliew’s services to literature have often been enumerated. 
He was the founder of the Academy, which has exercised so great 
an influence over style and thought in France. He may be 
credited also with the establishment of the Gazette, the first of 


160 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. x1, 


French newspapers. In the words of Martin, he ‘‘ gave birth at 
once to the two great enemies, whose contest was to fill the 
modern world, absolutism and the press.” But government patron- 
age has never been an unmixed benefit to literature. Corneille, the 
greatest poet of the age, was no favourite of the cardinal, who set 
himself to ensure the failure of the ‘‘ Cid.” Descartes, the greatest 
of French philosophers, found Holland a more favourable soil for 
independent thought than his native country, and published most of 
his works at Amsterdam. 

It was in foreign politics that Richelieu was most completely 
successful. He broke the force of the Catholic reaction, and by his 
alliance with Sweden saved Protestantism in northern Europe. He 
shattered the power of the Austro-Spanish empire, and paved the 
way for the aggrandisement of France under Louis XIV. Under 
different circumstances, and by different means, he did for France 
what Chatham did for England, and made his country the foremost 
of European powers. It has been well remarked that Richelieu 
invariably selected the rising cause in every country with which he 
was concerned and made it the instrument of his designs. “In 
England he was on the side of Parliamentary opposition to the 
crown. In Germany he was on the side of the opposition of the 
princes against the emperor. In Italy he was on the side of the 
independence of the states against Spain. In the Peninsula he 
was on the side of the provinces against the monarchy. ‘There is 
not the slightest reason to suppose that he cared one atom for these 
causes except so far as they might promote his own ends. Yet in 
every case he selected those causes by which the real wants of the 
several countries were best expressed.” ? 

§ 8. Louis XIII. received the news of Richelieu’s death without 
emotion and without regret. But he was nevertheless determined 
to carry out his policy. He at once called into his council 
the man who more than any other represented the views of the 
departed minister, cardinal Mazarin. Mazarin was in personal 
character a complete contrast to his predecessor. He could boast 
none of his commanding qualities. Adroit, supple, and without 
pride, he would fawn and cringe where Richelieu had dictated. 
His success was due to his great diplomatic talents, and he 
remained a diplomatist all his life. For domestic government he 
was unfitted, but in foreign politics and intrigues he was quite at 
home. In spite of his defects, his unquestionable ability enabled 
him to retain the reins of power until his death. 

The first symptom of a change of government was seen in a 


1 Gardiner, ‘Thirty Years’ War,’ p. 199. 


| 
| 


A.D, 1648-1648. REGENCY OF ANNE OF AUSTRIA. 161 


relaxation of the recent severity. Most of the political prisoners 
were set at liberty, and a large number of exiles returned to France. 
In foreign politics the old system was unhesitatingly continued. 
But it was doubtful how.long it could suryive the king, who was 
already dying. ‘The heir to the throne was not yet five years old, 
aud the only possible claimants to the regency were the queen, 
Anne of Austria, and the king’s brother, Gaston of Orleans. Both 
had been the life-long enemies of Richelieu, and both_had been in 
constant connexion with Spain. ‘The king determined if possible to 
tie their hands by an ordinance, which gave the regency to Anne 
and the lieutenant-generalship to Gaston, but made their authority ¢ 
dependent on a standing council of which Mazarin was the chief 
member. On 14th May, 1643, Louis XIII. died. He had enjoyed 
little real power during his life-time, and had naturally less after 
his death. His ordinance found no defenders, and was promptly 
cancelled by the Parliament of Paris, which entrusted absolute 
power to Anne of Austria. Everybody expected from the regent 
a complete reversal of French policy in favour of her native Spain. 
Intense was the astonishment when it was announced that Mazarin 
was to remain chief minister. ‘The subtle Italian had obtained a 
marvellous influence over the queen, who afterwards was secretly 
married to him. Still more intense was the disappointment of the 
young courtiers who formed the queen’s court. They had so 
confidently anticipated a new era, in which they -were to govern 
France, that they received the nickname of the “Importants.” In 
their despair they resorted to conspiracies under the duke of 
Beaufort, the son of the duke of Vendome. But their plots were 
soon discovered, and were suppressed with an energy and firmness 
which showed that the influence of Richelieu’s example had survived 
him. Beaufort was suddenly seized and imprisoned. Vendome and a 
number of lords and ladies, including the veteran intriguer Madame 
de Chevreuse, were driven into exile. Jor the next five years 
Mazarin and the regent ruled without opposition. They were in 
close alliance with the prince of Condé, whose’ son Enghien gave 
increased strength to the government by his brilliant victories. In 
1648 the treaty of Westphalia was concluded, and may be regarded 
as the triumph of the policy of Richelieu and his successor. France 
obtained important territories in the direction of the Rhine, and 
succeeded in severing Austria from its alliance with Spain. With 
the latter power war still continued. 2 | 
§ 9. While success attended French arms and diplomacy abroad, the 
home government was threatened by formidable disaffection. The 
‘chief source of difficulty Jay in the wretched financial administration 
which had prevailed ever since Henry 1V.’s death. Sully’s reforms 
i] 


162 MODERN EUROPE. CHap. xt. 


had perished with him; Richelieu’s short-lived attempt to follow his 
example had been a failure. Not only had the great EKuropean war 
immensely increased the expenditure, but Mazarin found it necessary 
to employ large sums of money in bribing possible opponents of his 
power. Extraordinary measures were resorted to to obtain supplies. 
But the worst grievance was, that of the money paid by the people 
a large portion of it never found its way into the coffers of the state. 
To the bankers who advanced loans were assigned the proceeds of 
certain taxes as security for principal and interest. These “ partisans ” 
as they were called, grew enormously wealthy, while the people 
were ground down by intolerable exactions. 

The task of representing the popular grievances was undertaken 
by the Parliament of Paris. ‘This institution had its origin in the 
court of peers created in the 12th century by Philip Augustus. St. 
Louis was the first to admit lawyers into the court, which he 
employed to restrict the judicial independence of feudalism. Under 
Philip the Fair, the lawyers rendered the greatest services to the 
monarchy, and from this time the nobles tended to disappear from 
the parliament altogether, which becomes purely an assembly of 
lawyers. It was not the only parliament in France, because a 
number of similar courts were created by successive kings in the 
provinces; but it was the most important, partly on account of its 
origin and partly. because it was established in the capital. A seat 
in the parliament was to be purchased like any other office in France. 
Under Henry IV., as we have seen, the right to a seat became 
hereditary, as long as the holder paid the paulette to the royal 
treasury. As the position of the lawyers became thus permanent 
and honourable, the assembly, which had once been the servile 
_instrument of the crown, began to make itself heard in opposition. 

By old usage royal edicts and ordinances had to be registered in the 
parliament before being carried out. This gave the members their 
only pretension to interfere with legislation or administration. 
They claimed the right to refuse to register an edict, and that this 
refusal made it invalid. This would have given them a right of 
veto, which must have produced a dead-lock. To overcome their 
opposition there was only one available method, the anomalous 
transaction known as a “bed of justice.” This was an occasion 
when the king appeared in person in the grand chamber and 
ordered the registration of an edict by his own authority. It was 
held that the king’s personal presence superseded the ordinary 
Powers of the magistrates. Under Richelieu the attempts of the 
parliament to control the administration had met with persistent 
and contemptuous refusal. But they had now a better ground for 
their pretensions in the part they had played in undoing the will of 


A.D. 1648. THE PARLIAMENT OF PARIS. 163 


the late king. It was they who had conferred the absolute regency 
upon Anne of Austria, and they naturally deemed themselves in 
some sense superior to a regent of their own creation. 

The Parliament of Paris, therefore, was, strictly speaking, only a 
central law court; it had no share in the executive or legislative 
powers. Nothing but the name was common between it and the 
English Parliament ; it was more like our court of King’s Bench. 
Still, such as it was, it was the only institution in France which 
had sufficient strength and consistency to oppose the government. 
It did not in any sense represent the people, it had not even a very 
deep interest in the popular welfare, but it found that a popular 
cause was a very useful instrument for advancing its own importance. 
Great influence was exercised in France by contemporary cvents in 
England, where the parliament had headed a successful revolt against 
the monarchy and was about to give a signal illustration of its power 
by the execution of the king himself. 

Under Mazarin the chief control of finances was entrusted to 
d’Emeri, who was also an Italian, and who on that ground shared the 
unpopularity of the chief minister. One of his measures for raising 
supplies was the imposition of a duty on all food brought into Paris. 
he measure was not unjust, but was very unpopular, and the 
parliament refused its consent. Mazarin had none of the unswerving 
firmness of Richelieu, and gave way. But money had to be obtained, 
and new taxes were imposed, which were registered by the authority 
of the young king in a bed of justice (Jan. 1648). The next day 
the parliament maintained that such an exercise of royal power by a 
minor was invalid, and revoked the registration. Just at this time 
the period for which the paulette was granted had expired, and the 
government determined to use the opportunity for enriching itself 
and for teaching a lesson to the too independent magistrates. The 
paulette was not renewed, and thus the hereditary character oftheir 
offices was destroyed. At the same time four years’ wages of the 
chief courts were declared to be confiscated. This attack on their 
common privileges exasperated the whole official class. ‘The four 
superior courts, or cours sowveraines, agreed to issue an “edict 
of union,” and to send delegates to a joint assembly held in the 
chamber of St. Louis. There they agreed upon a number of demands 
which were of great constitutional importance. The recently ap- 
pointed intendants were to be withdrawn; the taille was to be 
diminished by a quarter ; no impost was to be levied without the 
consent of the sovereign courts; and, to prevent the arbitrary 
imprisonments so common in France, every person arrested was to 
be brought before a judicial tribunal within twenty-four hours. It is 
obvious that the magistrates were aiming at powers far beyond any 


164 MODERN EUROPE. | CHAP. XI- 


they had hitherto exercised. ‘The younger members of the parlia- 
ment compared themselves with the senators of Rome. 

§ 10. Anne of Austria, who was imbued with Spanish conceptions of 
royal power, was enraged beyond measure at the insolent opposition 
of the parliament. But Mazarin, less haughty and less courageous, 
persuaded her to concede most of the demands made in the 
chamber of St. Louis. But similar assemblies were to be strictly 
forbidden for the future. The parliament regarded the concessions 
thus limited as unsatisfactory, and refused to accept them. They 
were supported by the sympathy of the Parisian populace, which 
was filled with a democratic spirit, and was under the influence of 
the most accomplished of agitators, Paul de Gondi, coadjutor of the 
archbishop of Paris, and known to fame as the cardinal de Retz. 
It was apparent that the quarrel between court and parliament was 
tending towards civil war, and this was precipitated by the action 
of the government. Encouraged by the news of a great victory 
gained by Condé at Lens, the regent ordered the arrest of three 
prominent members of the parliament, one of whom, Broussel, was 
the idol of the populace. His arrest roused the passions of the mob, 
barricades were raised in the streets, and the troops which attempted 
to restore order were repulsed. ‘Thus began the war of the Fronde, 
so called from a derisive comparison of the rebels to the Parisian 
gamins, who were accustomed to fight with slings (frondes). 

Anne of Austria, despite her haughty utterances, was compelled 
to release Broussel. ‘The aged citizen, in himself of no ability 
or importance, was received with extravagant demonstrations by 
the populace. ‘The weakness of the government encouraged its 
opponents. The most insulting language was openly used towards 
both regent and minister, and there was no power to punish it. 
Orderly government being impossible, the court suddenly quitted 
Paris for Rueil (September, 1648). It was thought that a siege of 
the capital was imminent, and the parliament. ordered the citizens — 
to arm. But the government soon found that war was out of the 
question. Money necessities were pressing; the peace of Westphalia 
was not yet signed, and the enemies of France triumphed in her 
internal dissensions. The regent again promised to grant the 
demands made by the chamber of St. Louis, and returned to 
Paris. The great peace was now concluded, and Mazarin was free 
to devote himself to: domestic affairs. But the first. financial 
measures aroused all the old dissensions. A permanent settlement 
was as far off as ever. ‘De Retz was the most powerful man in 
Paris. Once more the court determined’ to retire, this time to 
St. Germain, with the definite intention of reducing the rebellious 
capital by force of arms. The great Condé, who had shown some 


A.D. 1648. THE FRONDE. 165 


inclination to support the Fronde, was won over to the cause of 
monarchy. A speedy military success was anticipated. The 
parliament, however showed no fear. It undertook the vacant 
government, levied taxes, and raised troops for defence. Mazarin 
was declared a traitor, and condemned to exile. And the city and 
parliament were now joined by important allies, The French 
nobles gleefully regarded the outbreak of civil war as an opportunity 
for regaining that position from which Richelieu had ousted them. 
Condé’s brother, the prince of Conti, the dukes of Longueville; 
Rochefoucauld and Bouillon appeared in Paris, to support the 
popular movement. The duke of Beaufort, the leader of the 
“importants” five years ago, escaped from his prison at Vincennes, 
and at once acquired the greatest popularity as the “ 707 des halles.” 
Still more important than the nobles were the noble ladies who 
crowded to Paris, headed by the brilliant and beautiful duchess of 
Longueville. They threw themselves with all the energy of their 
pleasure-loving natures into the game of: political intrigue. From 
this time the Fronde degenerates. It is no longer the attempt of 
the mavistrature to impose constitutional checks on the monarchy, 
and becomes a selfish struggle of the aristocracy to regain their lost 
privileges. The welfare of the people, once so prominent a pretext, 
is more and more thrust into the background. | 

The civil war was as devoid of importance as of principle. Condé 
took place after place in the neighbourhood of-Paris. The rebel 
troops were defeated in every engagement. But the light-hearted 
nobles were wholly indifferent, and regarded these reverses as a 
subject for merriment and epigrams. | ‘lhe more serious leaders of 
the parliament were soon convinced that they had little.to hope 
from their new allies, and were disposed to come to terms with the 
court. This disposition was increased: by the intrigues of the 
nobles with the archduke Leopold, governor of the Spanish 
Netherlands, which alienated all patriotic citizens. Mazarin, on his 
side, was inclined to treat, on account of the threatening attitude 
assumed by Spain.- Throughout domestic difficulties he never lost 
sight of foreign politics. ‘The President Molé, the leader of the 
moderate party, headed an embassy to the court, and concluded a 
treaty at Rueil. But the nobles, who had already concluded an 
alliance with Spain, refused to accept the treaty, and induced the 
parliament to reject it. Turenne had been seduced: by the duchess 
of Longueville to bring his army to the side of the Fronde. The 
Spaniards entered Champagne. For a moment the military advan- 
tage seemed. to be on the side of the rebels. But Mazarin bribed 
the troops of Turenne to desert their leader, and the citizens showed 
themselves more and more averse to Spanish intervention. 'The 


166 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. xt. 


regent on her side consented to give more favourable terms to the 
parliament, and bought off the nobles with pensions and provincial 
governorships. ‘The treaty thus modified was at last accepted, and 
the court returned to Paris. 

This closes the first period of the Fronde. 

§ 11. The difficulties of the government were by no means at an 
end. The Fronde retained its organisation and its pretensions.. Still 
- more formidable was the prince of Condé, who regarded the return 
of the court as his work, and was determined to exercise supreme 
authority. He had not the slightest sympathy with the popular 
interests or wishes, and he regarded the parliament with undisguised 
contempt. His intention was to rely only on the noblesse, who 
were to resume their old position under his leadership. The 
members of the new aristocratic Fronde were nicknamed, from 
their haughty affectation, the ‘‘ petits-maitres.” Condé’s insolent dis- 
regard of parliament and people gave Mazarin an opportunity for 
getting rid of the prince. He formed an alliance with the leaders 
of the old Fronde, so recently his bitter enemies. De Retz was 
won over by the prospect of acardinal’s hat. Suddenly, in January, 
1650, Condé was arrested, with his brother Conti and his brother- 
in-law Longueville, and sent to Vincennes. The populace rejoiced 
in the event. 

But the imprisonment of the princes, so far from ending existing 
troubles, only gave rise to new ones. Discontent had spread from 
the capital to the provinces, and two of the great ladies of France 
set themselves to effect the release of the prisoners. Condé’s sister, 
the duchess of Longueville, escaped to Normandy, and thence to 
Holland, where she once more secured the support of Turenne, and 
concluded a treaty with Spain. At the same time Condé’s wife 
raised a revolt in Guienne. In face of these dangers Mazarin took 
energetic measures. Guienne was pacified by concessions which 
undid the centralising policy of Richelieu. Thence, at the head of 
an army, the cardinal marched to Champagne, which had been 
invaded by Turenne and the Spaniards. The former was completely 
defeated at Rethel, and his army dispersed. 

But Mazarin’s triumph over the party of the nobles only aroused 
fresh enemies against him. The old Fronde had sacrificed Condé 
merely because he treated their claims with contempt. They had 
never ceased to hate Mazarin, and they were not prepared to 
acquiesce in a new period of ministerial absolutism. Once more an 
alliance was arranged between the nobles and the party of the 
parliament. The two Frondes combined to attack Mazarin, and to 
demand Condé’s release. ‘The duke of Orleans, hitherto under the 
influence of Anne of Austria, was gained over by de Retz, and 


AD. 1649-1651. WARS OF THE FRONDE. 167 


refused to sit in the royal council as lorg as the cardinal was 
admitted to it. The regent was anxious to resist to the uttermost. 
She regarded Charles I.’s sacrifice of Strafford as the source of his 
misfortunes, and was determined to avoid a similar error. But 
Mazarin decided to yield. He went in person to release the princes 
in the vain hope of earning their gratitude, and then retired to 
Briihl in the electorate of Cologne, whence he continued to corres- 
pond with the queen and to direct her actions, 

Condé returned in triumph to Paris (February, 1651), and soon 
showed that he had learnt no wisdom from adversity. He refused 
to acknowledge the services rendered by the old Fronde, and 
treated the magistrates with his former haughtiness. The duke of 
Orleans he regarded as a possible rival in power, and he hated 
de Retz for the part he had played at the time of his imprison- 
ment. All his efforts were directed towards the aggrandisement of 
the nobles, and especially of his own family. He demanded for 
himself the government of Languedoc and Guienne, for his brother 
that of Provence. He treated with Spain as an independent power. 
He compelled the regent to dismiss the ministers who had been 
appointed under Mazarin. But Cendé’s violence, and his con- 
temptuous disregard of all allies, were again fatal to his supremacy. 
Anne of Austria, acting always under Mazarin’s advice, succeeded 
once more in gaining over de Retz and the party of the old Fronde. 
Condé soon found himself powerless in the capital, and retired to the 
south, determined to restore his power by force of arms. Anne of 
Austria, in order to weaken the influence of Orleans and Condé, had 
the young king Louis XIV. formally declared of age. Opposition 
to the government became now rebellion against the king’s person. 
The parliament was induced to declare Condé and his followers 
guilty of treason. 

__ France was again involved in civil war. Condé was joined by 
the nobles of southern France and speedily raised a considerable 
force. The Spaniards, ever eager to profit by French dissensions, 
agreed to assist him by an invasion of Champagne. Turenne 
was expected to support them. The court on its side prepared two 
armies, one under d’Harcourt to prevent Condé’s advance from 
Guienne, the other to oppose the Spaniards. The king with his 
mother left Paris for Poitiers. There Anne of Austria felt herself 
strong enough to recall Mazarin from his retirement. Louis XIY. 
went out in person to greet the cardinal, who brought a third army 
at his own expense, and who at once resumed his position as chief 
minister. One important success Mazarin had already gained. He 
had induced Turenne to desert Condé, and to come over to the 
king’s side. The two greatest generals of France were now to be 


168 - MODERN EUROPE. | 0S GRRE XI. 


opposed to each other. Condé saw at once that the struggle was 
not to be decided in the south. Leaving his brother Conti to- 
oppose d’Harcourt, he made his way with a handful of men through 
central France, and after a number of hairbreadth escapes he 
reached the northern army under the dukes of Nemours and 
Beaufort. At once assuming the command, he defeated a portion of 
the royalist army under d’Hocquincourt, and it was only the 
superior strategy of Turenne that saved the court from the danger 
of capture. Condé now determined to secure his position by gaining 
over the capital. He marched towards Paris and Turenne followed 
him. 

In Paris Mazarin’s return had produced a profound impression. 
All the enmity of the old Fronde revived against the hated minister. 
The parliament considered his recall a direct attack on its own 
authority. Not only were new edicts of banishment issued against 
the cardinal, but a price was put upon his head as a public enemy. 
The alliance so recently concluded with the court was thus broken 
off. But there was as yet no general desire to go over to Condé. 
De Retz and the other leaders wished to form a third party, with 
the duke of Orleans as its nominal head, and to utilise for their own 
advantage the contest between Condé and the court. When, there- 
fore, the prince, hurrying on in advance of his army, entered Paris, 
he found no genetal inclination to receive him. He was compelled 
to rejoin his troops in order to check the advance of 'Turenne, who 
had brought the court back to St. Germain. After a number of 
skirmishes, in which the royalists had the better, Turenne forced a 
general engagement on his opponent near the Faubourg St. Antoine. 
Condé was out-numbered and out-manceuvred. ‘lhe gates of the 
city were closed against him, and his army must have been cut to 
pieces but for the energy of Mademoiselle, daughter of Gaston of 
Orleans. Parading the streets, she roused the mob, and compelled 
the council to order the opening of the gate of St. Antoine. While 
Condé’s defeated troops poured into the city, she entered the 
Bastille and compelled the gunners to fire on the royalist troops. 
T'urenne was forced to retire, and Condé was master of Paris. A 
large number of magistrates and the bourgeois class were still hostile 
to him. But he had gained over the mob, which attacked and 
pillaged the Hotel de Ville. Condé took no steps to restrain a 
lawlessness which served his own ends. The parliament, which 
had refused to espouse his cause, was now compelled by terror to 
join him. A revolutionary government was set on foot. Gaston 
of Orleans was named lieutenant-general of the kingdom, Condé 
commander-in-chief, Beaufort, “ the king of the markets,” governor 
of Paris, and- Broussel; the hero of the barricades, provost of the 


A.D, 1652-1653. TRIUMPH -OF MAZARIN. 169 


merchants: But it was obvious that such a government, founded 
on violence, could not last long. All business was at an end, and 
the peaceful burghers saw themselves ruined unless order could be 
restored. This could only be done by the return of the king and 
court, to which all inclinations gradually tended. The great obstacle 
to peace was the old enmity against Mazarin, and this was removed 
by the action of the minister himself. Again of his own accord he’ 
determined to leave the court. But this time he had no fear of an 
overpowering combination of his enemies. His departure was only 
to assure: his ultimate success: it would detach the citizens 
from their alliance with the nobles, and bring about a speedy 
peace. 

Mazarin’s aiveieipationar? were fully verified. Coridé’s government 
found it impossible to maintain itself against the general desire for 
peace. The Spanish troops withdrew to defend the Netherlands, 
and the duke of Lorraine was bribed by Mazarin. Condé, finding 
himself no longer master of the situation, quitted Paris, October 14, 
1652, and sought a refuge with his Spanish allies. Within: a week 
the court returned to the capital, and the royal power was com- 
pletely re-established. Condé was sentenced to death, Beaufort 
and a number of other nobies to exile. Gaston of Orleans was 
ordered to reside at Blois, where he died in 1660; his daughter, 
the spirited Mademoiselle, who had at one time looked forward to 
a marriage with the king, was banished to her domains. De Retz 
was imprisoned. In February, 1653, Mazarin- returned, to be 
received with triumph by the king and courtiers, and with com- 
placency by the fickle citizens. The Fronde was‘at an end. The 
last obstacle in the way of a centralised despotism was swept away. 
‘The nobles had made their final effort to regain political importance 
and had failed. The citizens and magistrates had shown themselves 
too weak to control the monarehy. One prominent result the war 
had; it made a profound impression on the mind of the young king, 
and neniderad him resolutely hostile throughout his life to all ideas 
ss constitutional government. 

ve S12 "be edtel asin of domestic aistodtionced left the French 
monarchy at liberty to continue the war with Spain. During the last 
four years the Spaniards had recained many of the advantages they 
had lost. ‘They had retaken Barcelona and Casale, and several strong 
places in Flanders, including Gravelines, Ypres,-and-Dunkirk. 
‘They were now reinforced by the presence of the great Condé, who 
received the chief military command in the Netherlands.» But 
neither power was in a condition to carry on the war with vigour. 
France was exhausted by civil war and financial maladministration,: 
while the internal condition of Spain was still worse, . The only: 

g* 


170 MODERN EUROPE. CuaP. XI. 


military operations of any importance were carried on on the 
frontier between France and the Spanish Netherlands, and they 
derive their chief interest from the fame of the rival commanders, 
Condé and Turenne. In 1653 Condé, anxious to utilise what 
relics of power and influence still remained to him, invaded France 
and advanced far enough to threaten the capital. ‘The royal army 
was very small and incapable of meeting the enemy in the field. 
But Turenne’s tactics of harassing the invaders without risking a 
battle, were admirably suited to a small force and were completely 
successful. Condé had to retreat. In 1654, Louis XIV. tasted his 
first experience of war at the siege of Stenay, the fall of which was 
ensured by Turenne’s masterly tactics. Slowly but surely the 
French were gaining ground. ‘The two generals were fairly 
matched, but the old Spanish tactics were now out of date, and the 
once invincible infantry was almost useless in the face of the 
quick movements of light-armed troops which had been introduced 
by Gustavus Adolphus. It was only the genius and resolution of 
Condé that preserved the Spaniards from complete and crushing 
defeat. In 1656 they even gained a considerable success, and 
routed a detachment of the French army under the walls of 
Valenciennes. But this was completely overbalanced by the con- 
clusion of an alliance between France and England. Both the 
contending powers had earnestly sued for the support of Cromwell. 
The negotiations with Spain came to nothing owing to the religious 
bigotry that still prevailed at the court of Philip IV. At last 
Mazarin gained over tine Protector by promising to banish Charles 
I’s family from French soil, and to cede Dunkirk to England. 
Reinforced by 6000 Ironsides, probably the best soldiers in Europe 
at the time, ‘l'urenne was irresistible, After the fall of several 
smaller places, Dunkirk was besieged. 'The Spaniards under Condé 
and Don John of Austria, a natural son of Philip IV., hastened to 
its relief, but were completely routed. Dunkirk surrendered, and 
was handed over to the English in spite of the indignant complaints 
of the Catholic world. One after another the fortresses of Flanders 
were taken, and even Brussels was felt to be in imminent 
danger. 

Spain, thus hardly pressed, was anxious to obtain peace. Events 
elsewhere tended in favour of France. In 1657 the emperor 
Ferdinand ILI, died, and a new election took place. Mazarin 
despatched an envoy to Germany to canvas the electors in favour 
of Louis XIV. This ambitious project came to nothing, and another 
Hapsburg, Leopold I., ascended the imperial throne. But the French 
embassy was not without important results. The electors forced 
the new emperor to confirm the article in the peace of Westphalia 


A.D. 1653-1659. TREATY OF THE PYRENEES. Spt 


by which Austria was bound to send no assistance to Spain and to 
engage in no war against France. At the same time the League of 
the Rhine was formed by the chief German princes, both Catholic 
and Protestant, for the maintenance of the treaty of 1648. Thus 
France re-asserted its position in Germany, and- isolated Spain 
completely from the Austrian Hapsburgs. Another great advan- 
tage for Mazarin was the death of Cromwell. He had reaped the 
full benefit of the English alliance, and the Protector’s death enabled 
him to negotiate without any inconvenient regard for the interests 
of England. 

The negotiations between France and Spain were undertaken by 
the chief ministers of the two countries. Mazarin and Don Luis 
de Haro met on a small island in the Bidassoa, the frontier-line. 
There in 1659 they arranged the important treaty of the Pyrenees. 
It was evident that recent military successes had enabled France 
almost to dictate the terms. On the northern frontier Spain ceded 
Artois and a number of fortresses in Flanders, Hainault and 
Luxemburg. Lorraine was to be restored to Charles III., who had 
been expelled from his duchy on account of his alliance with 
Spain. But the fortifications of Nancy were to be rased, the duke 
was to make no war against France, and was to allow a free passage 
to French troops through his territories. Spain resigned all pre- 
tensions to Alsace, and confirmed the cession of that province 
which had been made in the peace of Westphalia. In the south 
France retained possession of Roussillon and Cerdagne, and thus the 
Pyrenees were fixed by law as well as by nature, as the boundary 
between the two countries. In return for all these gains France 
made comparatively slight concessions. It renounced all preten- 
sions to sovereignty in Italy, as it had done in all the great treaties 
of the sixteenth century. It promised to give no further support 
to the house of Braganza, under whose leadership Portugal had 
reclaimed its independence in 1640. And lastly, Condé was restored, 
not only to his private property, but also to his official dignities 
and to the governorship of Burgundy. 

The basis of all these provisions was the conclusion of a marriage 
between Louis XIV. and the infanta Maria Theresa. ‘l’his was a 
favourite design of Mazarin, but he was on the verge of being 
thwarted by the personal wishes of the king. Louis had conceived 
a passionate attachment for Maria Mancini, one of the cardinal’s 
nieces, and refused to hear of any other marriage. It required all 
the cardinal’s influence to overcome an inclination which was at 
once so flattering and so dangerous to his own family. At last he 
succeeded, and the treaty was finally signed (7 November, 1659) 
The next year Louis was married to Maria Theresa, who renounced 


4) 3 MODERN EUROPE. Onap. x1. 


all claims to the Spanish succession on condition of receiving a 
dowry of 500,000 crowns. ‘This renunciation was insisted upon by 
the Spanish court, though no one seems to have regarded it as 
important or even valid. On-the extinction of the male line ot 
Philip IV., the infanta’s claims could hardly be disregarded, 
especially as the dowry, on which the renunciation was conditional, 
was never paid. ‘This question was destined to give rise to 
important complications in the future. 

§ 18. Mazarin returned from his diplomatic triumph on the 


Bidassoa broken in health but more powerful than ever. Louis XIV.: 


regarded him rather as a master than as a minister; he refused to 
listen to those who suggested that he was too powerful; and was 
content to learn the principles of government from him. One ot 
Mazarin’s most notable precepts was that the king should have no 
chief minister. He and Richelieu had been the greatest of ministers, 


the real rulersof France. But henceforth the king himself begins: 


to govern, his officials are really servants, heads of departments, 
who have to apply to the king for instructions. Mazarin’s last 
days were mainly occupied in establishing the position of his family. 
His seven nieces all made distinguished marriages, and thus the 
nobles were bound more closely to the cardinal’s cause. On 9th 
March, 1661, Mazarin died. He left behind him an enormous 
fortune, collected by means that do little honour to his honesty or 
his patriotism. Part of this wealth he left to found the ‘Collége 
des quatre nations,” to which he also bequeathed his magnificent 
library. This college was intended to educate natives of those 
provinces which had been added to France by himself or by Riche- 
lieu—Roussillon, Alsace, Artois and Pinerolo. Thus the work ot 


union would be completed. ‘The younger generation would be: 


brought up in Paris, and would return to spread French culture 
and French interests in their native land. It was a bequest 
worthy of the statesman whose diplomacy had been so successful 
in extending the frontier of France. 


ie eee he 


CHAPTER XII. 
THE LESSER STATES OF EUROPE IN THE SEVENTEENTH CENTURY. 


I. Spain anp ITaty.—§ 1. Decline of Spain in the 17th century. § 2. 
Philip III. and Lerma; expulsion of the Moriscoes. § 3. Dismissal of 
Lerma; Spain involved in the Thirty Years’ War. § 4. Philip 1V. 
and Olivarez; foreign policy ; revolt of Catalonia and Portugal; fall 
of Olivarez. § 5. Rising in Palermo; Masaniello’s revolt in Naples ; 
the duke of Guise in Naples; the revolt suppressed ; termination of 
the French war; recognition of Portuguese independence. § 6. 
Disastrous reigu cf Charles II. § 7. The independent states of Italy ; 
Venice and the Turks. § 8. The Papacy: the Molinist controversy ; 
Paul V.’s quarrel with Venice; Urban VIII.; decline of the papal 
power. § 9. Savoy; steady growth of Savoy in the direction of Italy. 
II. THE Kinepoms or THE NortTH.—§ 10. Importance of northern 
history at this period; Sweden under the sons of Gustavus Vasa. 
§ 11. Denmark in the 16th century. § 12. Poland under Sigismund 
Augustus ; end of the male line of Jagellon; new Polish constitution ; 
Henry of Anjou; Stephen Bathori; Sigismund HI. § 13. Origin of 
the Russian monarchy; secularisation of the Order ‘of the Sword in 
Livonia; great northern war. § 14. General relations of the northern 
states; their’ importance in the history of the Catholic reaction; 
Charles 1X.’s reign in Sweden. § 15. Extinction of the House of 
turic in Russia; anarchy during the interregnum; the first and 
second False Demetrius; rivalry of Swedes and Poles in Russia; 
accession of the House of Romanoff. § 16. Gustavus Adolphus; his 
domestic govefhment ; war with Poland. § 17. Christina of Sweden ; 
war with Denmark; abdication of Christina. § 18. Charles X. of 
Sweden; consistent policy of Brandenburg during northern complica- 
tions; Charles X. makes war on Poland; the Great Elector secures 
the independence of Prussia. § 19. War between Sweden and Den- 
mark; treaty of Roeskilde; tenewal of war; Charles X.’s death; 
treaties of Oliva, Copenhagen, and Kardis, § 20. Royal supremacy 
established in Denmark. § 21. Charles XI. of Sweden: alliance with 
France; war with Brandenburg and Denmark; peace of 1679; 
absolute monarchy in Sweden. § 22. Poland after the peace of Oliva ; 
reign of John Sobieski; accession of Augustus the Strong; beginning 
of Peter the Great’s reign in Russia. II]. Toe Orroman TuRKs.— 
§ 23. Solyman the Magnificent; extent of the Turkish Empire. 
§ 24. Decline of the Turkish power; reign of Selim II.; battle of 
Lepanto; conquest of Cyprus. § 25. Weakness of Selim’s successors ; 
war with Venice. § 26. Revival of the Turkish power under Kiuprili; 
events in Transylvania; war with Austria; Montecuculi wins the 


174 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. x1. 


battie of St. Gothard; treaty of Vasvar. § 27. End of the war of 
Candia; attack upon Poland; achievements of Sobieski. § 28. 
Hungary in the 17th century; causes of discontent ; conspiracy against 
Austria; its suppression. § 29. Reign of terror in Hungary ; revolt 
of Ték6li; concessions offered by Austria. § 20. Ték6li allies himself 
with the Turks; siege of Vienna; its importance; condition of 
Europe at the time; relief of the city by John Sobieski. § 31. Alli- 
ance of Austria with Venice; Austrian successes against the Turks; 
suppression of the revolt in Hungary; conquest of Transylvania. 
§ 32. Temporary revival of the Turkish power; victories of Lewis of 
Baden and of Eugene; treaty of Carlowitz ; death of Ték6li. 


I. SPAIN AND ITALY. 


§ 1. Pururp II. left a sadly exhausted but still enormous empire to 
his son, Philip III. (1598-1621). In the first place, there was the 
whole united peninsula, with the addition of Roussillon and Cerdagne 
north of the Pyrenees. Naples, Sicily, Sardinia and Milan were 
provinces of Spain, and Spanish influence was almost supreme in 
Italy. Further north, came Franche-Comté, and then the Nether- 
lands. Seven provinces of the Netherlands were in open rebellion, 
but their practical separation had not been recognised. Beyond 
the seas, lay the immense colonies of Mexico and Peru, with their 
fabled treasures of gold and silver. The great Hapsburg monarchy 
had as yet escaped dismemberment. But during the next three 
reigns, which occupy the whole 17th century, all this was changed. 
Spain suddenly fell from its greatness to be scarcely a second- 
rate power. Internal exhaustion reacted on the external power ; 
from every war in which it engaged Spain emerged the loser, and 
gradually the magnificent empire was torn to pieces. France seized 
upon Roussillon and Cerdagne, Franche-Comté, and great part of the 
Southern Netherlands. Richelieu established French influence in 
Italy as a counterpoise to that of Spain. Holland enforced a tardy 
recognition of its hard-won independence. Portugal became once 
more a separate kingdom, and Catalonia was reduced only to very 
doubtful submission, The English and Dutch aggrandised themselves 
at the expense of Spanish colonies and commerce. This decline was 
due, partly to causes that were in working under Charles V. and 
Philip IL, partly to the feeble character and government of the 
succeeding kings. 

§ 2. Philip ILL, educated wholly by women and priests, had none of 
his father’s ability or taste for business. From the first he entrusted 
the cares of state to his favourite, the duke of Lerma, and contented 
himself with the performance of religious duties and the ceremonies 
of a stately court. Spanish etiquette was a model for the rest of 

furope. The churchmen reaped a rich harvest from the devotion 
of king and minister. Lavish grants of money and land increased 


A.D. 1598-1618. SPAIN UNDER PHILIP III. 175 


the already enormous wealth of the clergy. New monasteries and 
religious foundations were established and endowed. Almost every 
other country had found itself compelled to institute some kind of 
mortmain law: in Spain alone was ecclesiastical property allowed to 
increase far out of proportion to the riches of the country. At the 
same time this property was more free than elsewhere from the 
burden of public contributions. ‘The king’s religious zeal displayed 
itself even more disastrously in his persecution of the Moriscoes. 
Ever since the fall of Granada the conquered Moors had lived under 
cruel oppression. But like the Jews in a similar case, they had 
thriven in spite of it. They were the most industrious and the most 
skilful of the population. The Spaniards, partly from idleness and 
partly from pride, disliked trade and manufactures, and gladly left 
them in the hands of their more industrious inferiors. Thus the 
Moriscoes had obtained considerable wealth, and contributed largely 
to the welfare of the whole nation. But their religion, even when 
carefully concealed, was a terrible stumbling-block to kings who 
preferred to have no subjects at all rather than rule over heretics. 
Philip II. had issued a series of heartless edicts against them. They 
were forbidden to speak or write in Arabic, to sing a national air or 
to play on a Moorish instrument. They were compelled to attend 
mass, and to have their children baptised. Still they clung 
obstinately to the rites and customs which they could only practise 
in secret. Philip IL. determined by a signal act to prove his zeal 
for orthodoxy and the cause of the church. In 1609 an edict 
appeared which ordered the forcible expulsion of all Moriscoes from 
Spain, and their transference to the shores of Africa. This edict was 
earried out with the utmost barbarity, and within two years, more 
than half a million people were driven from the country of their 
birth into exile and poverty. It was a blow to the industrial 
resources of Spain from which that country never recovered. 

§ 5. It was perhaps fortunate that Lerma pursued that policy of 
peace which the Prince of Eboli had vainly urged against Alva under 
Philip II. The old aggressive attitude was given up. Peace was 
concluded with James I. of England, and in 1609 a truce with the 
Dutch ended the long and costly war of independence. The death of 
Henry IV. and the regency of Mary de Medici gave an opportunity for 
renewing and strengthening the alliance with France. Louis XIII. 
married the Spanish infanta, while a French princess was given 
to Philip IIL’s son and heir. But this policy of peace alienated the 
Austrian branch of the Hapsburgs, who had been accustomed to rely 
on Spanish hostility to France and devotion to the Catholic cause. 
It was at this moment that the Thirty Years’ War was about to 
break out. The Jesuits at the court of Vienna were occupied with 


176 : MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. xr. 


magnificent schemes for the restoration of Catholicism. For their 
execution the support of Spain was absolutely necessary, and the 
minister who opposed it must be got rid of. In 1618 the clerical 
party induced Philip to sacrifice Lerma, who carried the immense 
wealth which he had collected into retirement. His place was taken 
by his own son, the duke of Uzeda, who had turned against his 
father, and who governed Spain during the remainder of the reign. 
Spanish forces under Spinola co-operated with the Austrians on the 
Rhine and wasted the Palatinate. But Philip III. died in 1621, before 
he could witness the temporary success of the cause to which he had 
attached himself. His government had brought no happiness either 
to his subjects or to himself. It is a noteworthy fact, and not easy 
of explanation, that this period of political decline was the golden 
age of Spanish literature. Three writers have obtained European 
fame: Cervantes, who produced the immortal Don Quixote between 
1605 and 1618, and two of the most fertile and distinguished of 
romantic dramatists, Lope de Vega and Calderon. In the domain 
of,art Spain produced two of the greatest masters of the 17th century, 
Velasquez and Murillo. 

§ 4. Under Philip III. Spain had escaped any very great hubistie? 
tion, except the recognition of the United Provinces, which was in- 
paable: Philip IV.’s reign (1621-1665), on the other hand, was one 
long series of misfortunes and losses. - This difference was due, not 
so much to the inferiority of the younger king’s character, though 
this existed, as to the fact that the weak and vacillating regency 
of Mary de Medici gave way, in 1624, to the vigorous government 
of Richelieu. Philip IV. was only seventeen years old at his 
accession, and like his predecessor, he refused to be burdened with 
the control of the government. This was entrusted to another 
favourite, Olivarez, a man of considerable ability and energy, but 
no match for his great contemporary in France. ‘Tn foreign politics, 
Olivarez set himself to support the religious and ayAwiiC schemes 
of the Austrian Hapsburgs, while at home he aimed at the further 
aggrandisement of the monarchy. He began by an attempt to 
introduce some reform into the finances, but his object was rather 
to increase the revenue than to remove or redress grievances, and 
no lasting good was effected. The alliance with Austria provoked 
the hostility of Richelieu, who expelled the Spaniards from the 
Valtelline and thwarted them in the Mantuan succession. At last, 

‘in 1685, open war commenced between France and Spain, which 
from the first went in favour of the former power. Meanwhile 
Olivarez’ despotic government provoked domestic rebellion, of which 
his opponent was not slow to take advantage. It was only in 
Castile that absolute despotism had been established by preceding 


a ae ee 


» 
9. 
4 
\. 


A.D. 1618-1648. SPAIN UNDER PHILIP IV. 177 


kings. The northern and eastern provinces, especially Catalonia, 
still retained many of their ancient liberties. Olivarez, anxious to 
emulate the successes of Richelieu, determined to destroy these liber- 
ties, and to crush every element of opposition to the crown. But 
this attempt drove the Catalans, in 1640, into open revolt, and they 
found ready support from France. For the next sixteen years 
Catalonia was a French rather than a Spanish province. And the 
rebellion had further results, in encouraging disaffection in Portugal. 
The Portuguese had never forgotten their former independence, and 
endured the Spanish yoke with ill-concealed repugnance. In Decem- 
ber, 1640, a revolution was successfully accomplished, and John, 
duke of Braganza, in whose veins ran the blood of the old dynasty, 
was raised to the throne as John IY. Here, again, Richelieu saw 
his advantage in fostering internal disunion, and mainly through 
French assistance, the independence of Portugal was assured after 
a struggle of twenty-eight years. These disasters were fatal to the 
influence of Olivarez, who in 1648 was overthrown by a court’ 
intrigue. His place was taken by Don Luis de Haro, who succeeded 
to all the difficulties caused by his predecessor, and was possessed 
of still less ability to confront them. 

§ 5. While. disaffection was thus rife within the limits of the 
peninsula, it was impossible to retain the obedience of the Italian 
provinces, which the king never visited, and which were regarded 
merely as a source of revenue. The first duty of each viceroy was to 
supply the necessities of the court at Madrid, and these necessities 
were at their height in this period of foreign war and domestic 
revolt. And not only were the taxes heavy, but their incidence 
was unjust and oppressive. The nobles, clergy and official classes 
claimed exemption from the public burdens, which fell with all the 
greater weight on the middle and lower classes. These grievances 
led to a rising in 1647 in Palermo, the seat of government in 
Sicily. The viceroy endeavoured in vain to put down the 
movement by concessions, and he was forced to fly from the city. 
But the noble and wealthy classes felt their interests threatened by 
the excited populace; with their assistance, the government put 
down the rising, and restored order in Sicily. Meanwhile these 
events had exercised an important influence in Naples. . In that 
province, the duke of Arcos, the Spanish governor, had imposed 
heavy duties on all the necessaries of life. A tax on fruit, so 
important in that southern climate, at last provoked a rising among 
the excitable lower classes. They found a leader of energy and 
ability in a fisherman of Amalfi, T'’ommaso Aniello, or, as the 
people loved to call him, Masaniello. The duke of Arcos, who 
resolved to make no concessions, had not sufficient military force 


178 MODERN EUROPE. CHap, xi. 


to support his resolution, and had to withdraw the obnoxious taxes. 
He then shut himself up in the Castello Nuovo, and the city was 
left to anarchy. Masaniello now became supreme. He received 
the title of ‘‘ Captain-General of the people,” and exercised his power 
with a wisdom and moderation that could hardly have been 
expected. But this alienated his more extreme followers, and 
when he entered into negotiations with the viceroy, he lost all hold 
upon the people. Arcos thought this a good opportunity to get rid 
of the demagogue, and Masaniello was shot by bravos in the pay of 
Spain. But the rebellion survived his death. The people soon 
recognised their error, and buried their leader with great pomp. As 
his successor they chose a Spanish noble, the Prince of Massa, and 
fresh disturbances commenced. Arcos was besieged in the castle 
and forced to make new concessions. At this conjuncture a Spanish 
fleet arrived under the command of Don John of Austria, a natural 
son of Philip IV. Anattempt was made to suppress the revolt by 
a treacherous stratagem. A general amnesty was proclaimed, with 
a confirmation of all concessions. While the populace was thus 
satisfied and quiet, the soldiers were landed to occupy the city. 
But the treachery was soon discovered, and the enraged people drove 
the troops back to the ships. The Prince of Massa, who had 
throughout been in connexion with the government, was beheaded, 
and in his place was elected an armourer, Gennaro Annese. [rom 
this time the rebels went to extremes, and determined upon separation 
from Spain. As was natural, they turned for assistance to France. 
Negotiations were opened with the Spanish envoy at Rome, and 
these came to the ears of the duke of Guise, who happened to be at 
the papal court. He was descended from the Angevin family which 
had so long and so unsuccessfully .claimed the crown of Naples. 
The opportunity of reviving this claim was too attractive to his 
adventurous and romantic nature to be neglected. He was received 
with the greatest enthusiasm in Naples, where his presence was 
regarded as an earnest of French support. It was determined to 
exchange the suzerainty of Spain for that of France. But Guise’s 
real object was to gain the crown for himself, and this was not 
likely to be approved by the French court. Mazarin was very 
eager to sever Naples from Spain, but not in the interests of Guise, 
nor in alliance with the lower classes. He wished to gain over the 
nobles, who had perforce been driven on to the Spanish side by the 
popular excesses. Still he was unwilling. to lose the chance of 
striking a blow at the enemy, and a fleet was sent to Naples. 
But it arrived late, and as the commander refused to recognise 
Guise, it returned without doing anything. And meanwhile Guise 
had quarrelled with the popular leader, Gennaro Annese, who 


Pe ee 


7 


ee ee ee ee a ee 


A.D. 1648-1668. INDEPENDENCE OF PORTUGAL. 179 


became disgusted with the prospect of French rule, and opened 
negotiations with Spain. At this opportune moment, the hated duke 
of Arcos was recalled, and his authority fell to Don John of Austria, 
who was inclined to a more moderate policy. Annese opened the 
gates during the absence of Guise, and the Spanish troops speedily 
rendered themselves masters of the city. The traitor Annese met 
a well-merited death with the other leaders of the populace, and 
the rebellion was at an end (April, 1648). 

The peace of Westphalia brought no cessation of hostilities 
between Spain and France, but the civil disturbances of the Fronde 
gave a temporary advantage to the former. In 1652 Don John of 
Austria, who rivalled the achievements though not the fame of his 
great namesake in the previous century, succeeded in taking 
Barcelona, and in driving the French from Catalonia. But the policy 
of Olivarez was given up, and the province was confirmed in its 
rights and privileges. From this time the energies of Spain were 
absorbed in the war in Flanders, which was decided by the 
interference of Cromwell, and was closed by the treaty of the 
Pyrenees (1659). The peace, which was purchased with great 
territorial concessions, enabled Spain to devote its energies to the 
recovery of Portugal. But the marriage of Catherine of Braganza 
with Charles II. gave that country the support of England, and 
Louis XIV., after failing to obtain a recognition of his eventual 
claims to the Spanish succession, continued to send assistance to 
the rebels. In 1665 the long conflict was practically decided by 
the battle of Villa Viciosa, where the victory was won by the 
French contingent under Schomberg. In the same year Philip IV.’s 
disastrous reign closed, and he left a sadly diminished empire to his 
only son, Charles II. 

§ 6. The new king was only in his fourth year, and already dis- 
played that weakness of body and mind which incapacitated him for 
any real share in the Government even after he grew up. The regency 
was entrusted to his mother, Maria Anna of Austria, who was 
wholly under the influence of her confessor, Father Nithard, whom 
she had brought with her on her marriage. The new government 
was ill-fitted to recover any of the ground lost during the late 
reign. In 1668 the peace of Aix-la-Chapelle gave great part of 
Flanders. to France, and the treaty of Lisbon recognised the 
independence of Portugal. These disasters increased the natural 
hostility of the grandees to the rule of a woman and a Jesuit. An 
opposition party was formed under the leadership of the king’s 
half-brother, Don John of Austria. Father Nithard was compelled 
to retire to Rome, whence he still directed the actions of the queen- 
mother. At length, as Charles II. grew older, Don John succeeded 


180 | MODERN EUROPE. Cuar. xu. 


in alienating him from his mother, who retired to a convent. But 
the prince who now obtained the government showed far less 
ability as a statesman than as a soldier. One disaster followed 
another in the French wars, and Don John only lived to conclude 
the treaty of Nimwegen. 

Maria Anna returned from her convent to resume the control of 
the state. From this time the history of Spain becomes unim- 
portant. ‘ihe decline of internal and external resources continued 
with frightful rapidity. Charles II., contrary to general expecta- 
tion, survived the century, and his death in 1700 ended the male 
line of the Spanish Hapsburgs. In the great contest for the succes- 
sion which now ensued, the dismemberment of the Spanish Empire 
was continued and completed. 

§ 7. That Spain during this century of decline and disaster kept a 
firm hold on its distant territories in Italy was due, not to any 
merits of the government, but to the complete lack of national 
feelings and political capacity shown by the Italians, and to the 
mutual antipathy existing between the various classes of society. 
As has been seen, the revolts in Sicily and Naples failed mainly 
through the want of sympathy between the nobles and the people. 
The only independent powers whose attitude was of the least 
importance, were the grand dukes of Tuscany, the Venetians, the 
popes and the dukes of Savoy. The Medicean grand dukes at this 
time threw themselves unreservedly into the hands of Spain, and 
by sacrificing their independence, secured uninterrupted tenure of 
power. But they showed none of the ability, nor even the taste 
for literature and art, which had given such fame to the founders of 
the family. They became the abject servants of the priesthood, 
and under their rule Florence sank entirely from its former 
grandeur. ‘The line became extinct in 1737 with Giovanni 
Gaston, the last of the Medici. Venice was during this century 
almost entirely absorbed in its long war against the Turks. The 
republic leaned to the side of France against Spain, and was the 
first power to recognise Henry IV., but eastern complications 
prevented its taking a prominent part in western politics. Cyprus 
had been already lost, and the first half of the century was mainly 
occupied with the struggle for the possession of Crete. In 1669 Candia 
fell, and the island was annexed by the Turks. The war was now 
transferred to Greece, where the famous Venetian commander, 
Morosini, conquered the Peloponnese (1684-9). This was formally 
ceded to them by the peace of Carlowitz in 1699, but was 
reconquered by the Turks in 1715, and the long and wearisome 
warfare, as creditable as it was exhausting to the maritime Be i 
was not ended till the treaty of Passarowitz in 1718. 


ss | 


ee ee ee ee 


A.D. 1668-1700. THE PAPACY. 181 


§ 8. The papacy continued to direct the progress of the Catholic 
reaction, until that movement was stayed by the failure of Austria 
in the Thirty Years’ War. From that time it had to content itself 
with lesser interests, the government and extension of the papal 
states, and the settlement of internal disputes within the church. 
It became evident that not only had the popes failed to restore 
their rule over European Christendom, but their authority over the 
Catholic states was weakened by these disputes and by the 
independence of the secular powers. Sixtus V. was succeeded by three 
short-lived popes (1590-1), each of whom ruled only long enough 
to reverse the policy of his predecessor. Clement VIII. (1592-1605) 
was the first pope to break off the subservience to Spain which had 
prevailed ever since Pius IV. He gave absolution to Henry IV., 
and was enabled by French support to annex Ferrara to the papal 
states on the death of Alfonso II. of Este (1597). To his medi- 
ation was due the treaty of Vervins in 1598. During this pontificate 
a great contest broke out between the Jesuits and Dominicans. 
The doctrines of free-will, which were expounded by the Jesuit 
Molina, were regarded as an attack on the teaching of the great 
Dominican, Thomas Aquinas. Spain espoused the cause of the 
latter order, because the Jesuits, founded by a Spaniard, and at first 
working wholly in the interests of Spain, had now become more 
independent. ‘The first generals of the order had all been Spaniards, 
but the office was now held by an Italian, Aquaviva. France 
naturally sided with the Jesuits, and Clement VIII., unwilling to 
offend his chief ally, died in 1605 without coming to a decision. 
Paul V. (1605-1621) was imbued with medieval ideas as to the 
papal authority and the validity of the canon-law. ‘These speedily 
brought him into collision with the secular power, especially in 
Venice, which had always maintained an attitude of independence 
towards the papacy. cclesiastical disputes were aggravated by 
the fact that the acquisition of Ferrara had extended the papal 
states to the frontiers of Venice, and that frequent differences arose 
as to the boundary line between them. ‘The defence of the 
republic and of the secular authority in church affairs was under- 
taken with great zeal and ability by Fra Paolo Sarpi, the famous 
historian of the Council of Trent. Paul V. did not hesitate to 
excommunicate -the Venetians, but the government compelled 
the clergy to disregard the pope’s edict. The Jesuits, Theatines, 
and Capuchins were the only orders that adhered to the papacy, and 
they had to leave the city. . If Spain had not been under the rule 
of the pacific Lerma, it would probably have seized the opportunity 
to punish Venice for its French alliance. But France and Spain 
were both averse to war, and Paul V. had to learn that the papacy 


182 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. xr. 


was powerless without secular support. By the mediation of the 
two great powers, a compromise was arranged in 1607. The 
Jesuits, however, remained excluded from Venetian territory for 
another half-century. This was the first serious reverse encoun- 
tered by the Catholic reaction. The Jesuits had earned the pope’s 
eratitude, and in return they obtained a decisi6én which pacified the 
Dominicans, without condemning the doctrines of either party. 
The attention of the Catholic world was now absorbed in the 
Austrian schemes for the repression of Protestantism in Germany, 
which received the unhesitating support both of Paul and of his 
successor, Gregory XV. The latter was a great patron of the 
Jesuits. Under him the Propaganda was first set on foot, and the 
two greatest members of the order, Ignatius Loyola and Francis 
Xavier, received the honour of canonisation. 

The pontificate of Urban VIII. (1623-1644) was a period of great 
importance. He regarded himself rather as a temporal prince than 
as head of the Church. He fortified Rome and filled his states 
with troops. The example of Julius II. seemed to find an imitator. 
Urban was imbued with the old Italian jealousy of the imperial] 
power, and allied himself closely with France. Papal support 
encouraged Richelieu to take decisive measures in the Valtelline, 
Casale, and the Mantuan succession. And at the moment when 
Ferdinand II. had gained his greatest success in Germany he was 
confronted with the hostility of the pope. Gustavus Adolphus 
landed in Germany, and by a strange coincidence Protestantism 
found support in the temporal interests of the papacy. The Catholics 
were astounded and dismayed by Urban’s attitude. The Spanish 
envoy presented a formal protest, which was disregarded. The 
failure of the Catholic reaction was thus due in no small measure to 
the action of the pope himself. 

Urban VIII. succeeded in making an important addition to the 
papal states by the annexation of Urbino, in 1681, on the death ot 
Francesco Maria, the last duke of the Della Rovere family. But in 
the government of the states he met with great difficulties. 
Nepotism had been revived in a new form since Sixtus V. The 
relatives of the pope no longer aimed at political independence, but 
were entrusted with the control of the administration. Thus each 
papacy witnessed the foundation of a new family which acquired 
sufficient wealth to maintain its position after its patron’s death. 
The aristocracy thus formed proved a great obstacle to the papal 
government. Urban VIII.’s relatives, the Barberini, quarrelled 
with the Farnesi, who had held Parma and Piacenza since the ponti- 
ficate of Paul III. The pope was induced to claim the district of 
Castro, and this claim aroused a civil war (1641-1644) in which the 


aS ee Se eS ee a ee ae ee 


AD. 1555-1631. SAVOY. 183 


papacy was completely worsted. Urban was forced to conclude a 
humiliating treaty and directly afterwards died. His successors are 
of very slight importance to the history of Europe. The great 
schemes of a counter-reformation had perished. Even within their 
own states the personal authority of the popes was curtailed by the 
rise of the Congregation, which had been founded by Urban VIII., 
and after his death obtained the chief control of the administration: 
The only important questions in which the papacy was involved in 
the latter half of the century were the schism of the Jansenists and 
the relations with Louis XIV., and these concern the history of 
France rather than that of Italy. 

§ 9. Savoy owes its importance at this period not to its internal 
strength but to its geographical position between the territories of 
France and Spain. The duchy, after several years’ occupation by 
the French, was restored by the peace of Cateau-Cambresis (1559) 
to Emanuel Philibert, the general of Philip II. He was anxious to 
recover the territories on both sides of the Lake of Geneva, which 
the Swiss had acquired at the expense of Savoy during the dis- 
turbances of the reformation. But in 1564 he had to accept the 
treaty of Lausanne, by which he gave up all territories to the north 
of the lake. From this time Savoy tends to lose ground in the 
north and to extend itself southwards; to become an Italian rather 
than a transalpine power. Emanuel Philibert devoted himself 
mainly to domestic government, and to repair the evils that the 
foreign occupation had left behind. He remained true to his 
attachment to the House of Hapsburg, but he was careful at the 
same time not to provoke the hostility of France. By this well- 
timed policy of peace, he was enabled to leave his duchy immensely 
strengthened to his son Charles Emanuel (1580-1630). The new 
duke was much more active in his policy. His marriage with a 
daughter of Philip II. bound him to the side of Spain and he sup- 
ported the cause of the League in France. With the help of the 
Catholic party he seized the vacant marquisate of Saluzzo, and 
thus involved himself in a long quarrel with Henry IV. In 1601 the 
peace of Lyons-confirmed the duke in the possession of Saluzzo, in 
exchange for which he ceded Bresse on the Rhone frontier to Henry. 
All attempts made to recover Geneva for Savoy proved unsuccess- 
ful. Before his death the restless Charles Emanuel brought forward 
another claim to the marquisate of Montferrat. This had been held 
since 1533 by the dukes of Mantua, whose male line became extinct in 
1627. ‘The duke did not live to see the settlement of the Mantuan 
succession, but his son, Victor Amadeus I., obtained great part of 
Montferrat by the treaty of Cherasco (1631). Richelieu had now 
acquired Pinerolo and Casale for France and this effected a complete 


184 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP, XII. 


change in the policy of Savoy. Victor Amadeus was married to 
Christine, a daughter of Henry IV., and he and his successor 
remained till nearly the end of the century as faithful to France 

as his predecessors had been to Spain. Charles Emanuel II., who 
succeeded as a minor on the early death of his father, was at first 
under the guardianship of his mother, and when he came of age 
remained in the closest alliance with Louis XIV. His great object 
was to secure the Italian position which Savoy had assumed, by 
the acquisition of Genoa. But the maritime republic made a 
successful resistance both to open attack and to treacherous plots. 
Victor Amadeus II., who became duke in 1675, was married toa 
daughter of Philip of Orleans. But Louis XIV. had begun to treat 
Savoy less as an ally than as a dependency, and the duke, weary of 
French domination, broke off the old connexion, and in 1690 
joined the League of Augsburg against Louis. His defection was 
well-timed and successful, for the treaty of Ryswick (1697) gave 
him the great fortresses of Pinerolo and Casale, which had so long 
dominated his duchy. In the war of the Spanish succession he first 
supported Louis and afterwards turned against him. His faithless- 
ness was rewarded in the peace of Utrecht with the island of Sicily 
and the title of king. Within a few years, however, he was com- 
pelled to exchange Sicily for Sardinia. The gradual transformation 
of Savoy into an Italian state has had important consequences 
for the history of Italy. 


IJ. Tue Kinepoms or tHE Norts. 


§ 10. No portion of European history is more intricate and 
confusing than that which describes the relations of the northern and 
eastern states in the 16th and 17th centuries. It would require a 
volume to follow the details of the continual and complicated wars 
between Sweden, Denmark, Poland, and Russia. But the period is 
one of considerable importance, and it is necessary to grasp its leading 
features. Sweden emerged from its subjection to Denmark, became 
Protestant, and in the 17th century took rank among the great 
continental powers. Poland was weakened by its oligarchical con- 
stitution, its elective monarchy, and the reactionary religious policy 
of its rulers, and speedily sank from the great position it had 
assumed under the House of Jagellon. But by far the greatest 
event of the period was the rise to European importance of the great 
monarchy of the Czars. 

In a preceding chapter we have noticed the dissolution of the 
Union of Calmar between the Scandinavian kingdoms. Sweden 
gained its independence under Gustavus Vasa, who founded a 


—. a a ee a 


A.D. 1544-1648. THE NORTHERN KINGDOMS. 185 


strong monarchy, which passed on his death to his son Eric. .This 
prince had none of his father’s qualities, and early showed symptoms 
of an insanity which rapidly developed. He was engaged in 
constant quarrels with his brothers John of Finland, and Charles of 
Scedermanland, and in 1568 was deposed.by the former. John 
was married to a princess of the house of Jagellon and was able 
through this to secure the vacant crown of Poland for his son 
Sigismund in 1587. But Sigismund became a bigoted Roman 
Catholic, and his religious policy speedily alienated his Protestant 
subjects when he became king of Sweden in 1592 by his father’s 
death. His uncle Charles, the ablest of Gustavus Vasa’s sons, 
took advantage of this to assume first the government and after- 
wards the crown of Sweden as Charles 1X. He was the father of 
the great Gustavus Adolphus. 

§ 11. In Denmark, Christian II., the last king of the three 
Scandinavian countries, whose brutality provoked the revolt of 
Sweden, was deposed in 1523 in favour of his uncle Frederick, duke of 
Holstein. Frederick I.’s eldest son, Christian IIT., had to fight for 
three years against Christopher of Oldenburg and the Hanse towns 
before he could obtain the crown, which he did ultimately through 
the assistance of Gustavus Vasa. He made Protestantism the 
established religion of Denmark in 1536, and he recognised the 
‘independence of Sweden by the treaty of Brémsebro in 1541. His 
son Frederick II. (1559-1588) continued to bear the arms of the 
three kingdoms, and this provoked Eric of Sweden into war against 
Denmark. The treaty of Stettin in 1570 closed the war just 
after the accession of John to the Swedish throne. Denmark 
resigned all claims to Sweden, but retained possession of all its 
territories in the northern peninsula, Norway, Skaania, Halland, 
Blekingen and Jamteland. Frederick II. is famous as the patron 
of the great astronomer 'ycho Brahe. He was succeeded by his 
son Christian IV. (1588-1648) who earned a good reputation by 
his domestic government, but who played but a sorry part in the 
Thirty Years’ War. | 

§ 12. Poland was ruled at this time by Sigismund Augustus 
(1548-72), the last male of the great family of Jagellon, which had 
held the crown since 1386. By their accession Lithuania and Poland 
had been brought under a common ruler, but the two countries had 
never been really united. This was at last accomplished by Sigis- 
mund Augustus in 1569 under the pressure of Russian invasion. 
During his reign Protestantism obtained a great position and almost 
a preponderance in Poland, and the king, though himself a Catholic, 
did nothing to stay its progress. To some extent his hands were 
tied in religious matters by his position as suzerain of the secularised 

10 


186 MODERN EUROPE. — Cuap. xit. 


states of Livonia and Prussia. On his death in 1572 without 
children, the Polish estates decreed that thenceforth the crown 
should be purely elective, without restriction to any family, and 
that Protestants and Catholics should have equal political rights. 
They also drew up a constitution which limited political power to 
the nobles, and made Poland an oligarchical republic with a 
nominal head. ‘The first elected king was Henry of Anjou, brother 
of Charles IX. of France, and the guilty author of the massacre of 
St. Bartholomew. He was compelled to accept the decrees of the 
diet, a promise which he would hardly have kept, but on the 
news of his brother’s death he escaped secretly from Poland, four 
menths after his coronation, to ascend the French throne. The 
Poles now chose Stephen Bathori of Transylvania, who was married 
to Anne, a sister of the last Jagellon. In his reign, though he was 
personally inclined to moderation in religious matters, the Catholic 
reaction was commenced in Poland. This was due mainly to the 
exertions of the Jesuits, who obtained admission into the kingdom 
in 1570 and gained over the most powerful nobles. On Bathori’s 
death in 1586 the Catholic party secured the election of Sigis- 
mund III., son of John of Sweden, who took vigorous measures 
for the restoration of Catholicism, and by his religious policy 
sacrificed the Swedish crown. 

§ 13. The Russian monarchy had been founded in the 9th century 
by Ruric, a prince of Scandinavian origin. he capital was first fixed 
at Novgorod and afterwards at Kief. But Ruric and his descendants 
possessed none of that absolute authority which we are accustomed 
to associate with Russian rule. Their power was limited by the 
existence of strong municipalities, and by the practices of granting 
large apanages to younger members of the royal house. The 
disunion thus caused facilitated the conquest of Russia by the 
Tartars or Moguls in the middle of the 13th century. For two 
hundred years the country groaned under their barbarous despotism, 
which ground the people in slavery and abject poverty. Gradually, 
however, the princes of Moscow, descendants of Ruric, rose to 
eminence, not by military prowess, but by a policy of wiles and 
treachery. ‘They ingratiated themselves with the Tartar rulers, and 
artfully employed them to crush the princes who might be their 
rivals. At length they were strong enough to shake off the galling 
yoke. Iwan III. (1462-1505) allied himself with the Tartars of 
the Crimea, and with their help defeated the rulers of Russia, the 
Tartars of the Golden Horde. Iwan and his son Vassily Iwanovitch 
put an end to the independence of the great municipalities, and 
also crushed the great princes who had arisen under the system of 
apanages. These princes, on losing their independence, became 


A.D. 1462-1595. RISE OF RUSSIA. 187 


the boyars of the court at Moscow. From this time Russia, in- 
dependent and centralised, was enabled to play a more and more 
prominent part in European politics. Iwan IV. (1533-1584), 
known by the well-merited name of the Terrible, was the first 
who assumed the famous title of Czar. He reduced to submission 
the Tartars of Kazan, the third of the great Tartar tribes, and 
by the conquest of Astrakhan extended the Russian boundaries to 
the Caspian. But his great ambition was to obtain a hold 
on the Baltic, and it was this which brought him into collision 
with the Western powers. 

We have seen how the Teutonic Order was forced into subjection 
to Poland, and how its territories were finally secularised by Albert 
of Brandenburg, and became a duchy under Polish suzerainty. A 
similar order, the Knights of the Sword, ruled in Livonia. They 
had been fora long time amalgamated with the Teutonic Order, but 
obtained independence under Walter of Plattenberg. The progress 
of Protestantism among the knights gave rise to great disorder, and 
Iwan IV. sought to take advantage of these to conquer their 
territories, which would give him the coveted access to the Baltic. 
Pressed by this danger, the grand master, Gothard Kettlér, deter- 
mined toimitate Albert of Brandenburg. He adopted the Lutheran 
doctrines, offered the greater part of his territories to Poland, on 
condition that the remainder should be formed into the hereditary 
duchy of Courland for himself and his descendants. The offer was 
accepted by Sigismund Augustus, but the treaty could not be 
executed without a long war. Sweden claimed Esthonia and the 
northern territories of the order, and the Czar refused to give up 
his schemes of conquest. A long war ensued, in which Russia, 
Poland and Sweden contended for the possession of Livonia. The 
vigorous measures of Stephen Bathori forced Iwan IV. to conclude 
a truce in 1582, by which Poland gave up its conquests but kept 
Livonia. The claims of Sweden remained unsatisfied till 1593, 
when a truce with Iwan’s successor, Feodor, gave the Swedes 
Esthonia, Narva and Revel. These arrangements were confirmed 
in 1595 by the peace of Teusin between the three powers. Russia, 
so successful in the south, was compelled to give way in the north- 
west, and to postpone the scheme of obtaining a frontier on the 
Baltic. coast. 

§ 14. The key to the political relations of the four northern states 
is to be found in the eager desire of each to obtain supremacy over the 
Baltic. It had not yet been realised how completely the great 
geographical discoveries had deprived that sea of its medieval 
importance. It was: this which had caused the decline of the 
Hanse Towns, but the position which they had occupied seemed as 


188 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. XII. 


desirable as ever to the powers which wished to take their place. 
There were also special grounds of quarrel between Sweden and 
Denmark and between Sweden and Poland. The Danish kings had 
by no means accepted as final the dissolution of the Union of 
Calmar, and their command of the Sound and Belts enabled them to 
cripple the rising Swedish commerce. Between Sweden and Poland 
there was the disputed claim to Esthonia, and still more serious 
dynastic and religious differences. ‘The northern states were at this 
time brought into close and novel connexion with the main current 
of European politics. The Catholic reaction, supported by the 
arms of Phillip II. had suffered great reverses in the successful 
revolt of Holland, in the destruction of the Great Armada, and in 
the establishment of Henry IV. on the throne of France. The last 
chance of recovering these losses was bound up with the election ot 
the Catholic Sigismund III. in Poland, and his succession to Sweden 
on the death of his father John. He had the enthusiastic support 
of the pope and of the Hapsburgs of Spain and Austria. Philip II. 
hoped, with the aid of Sweden, to revive Spanish commerce in the 
Baltic, and to strike a fresh blow from the north against England 
and the revolted Netherlands. Against these Spanish-Catholic 
schemes all the hostile interests centred round the champion of 
Swedish Protestantism, Charles of Sceedermanland. The decision of 
the great European question depended upon the struggle between 
Charles and Sigismund, which was decided by the battle of 
Stangebro in 1598. Charles obtained the supreme government of 
Sweden, and in 1604 received the crown, which was declared 
hereditary in his descendants both male and female. Charles IX. 
is the second founder of the Swedish monarchy on a Protestant 
basis. The work of Gustavus Vasa had been undone during the 
troubled reigns of Eric, John and Sigismund. The nobles had 
regained the independence which they had enjoyed in the time 
of the Union. The military, naval and commercial organisation of 
the first Vasa had fallen to pieces. All this was now altered. 
The nobles were reduced into subjection to the crown, and those 
who had supported Sigismund were punished with relentless 
severity. Measures were taken to revive the internal welfare of 
Sweden. But Charles IX. was interrupted in his beneficent work 
by a renewed Danish War. Christian IV. of Denmark considered 
the opportunity favourable for the renewal of. claims which had 
been tenrporarily renounced in the treaty of Stettin. In 1611 he 
besieged and took Calmar. Charles IX. died at the commencement 
of hostilities and left the crown to his famous son, Gustavus 
Adolphus. The young king was eager for military glory, but his first 
war was not successful. The Danes took one town after another, 


ee a eS 


A.D. 1584-1610. INTERREGNUM IN RUSSIA. 189 


and when peace was made in 1613, Sweden had to purchase the 
restoration of these conquests with a large bribe. Elfsborg, the only 
point of importance which the Swedes held on the north sea, was 
left in Danish hands as a security. 

§ 15. The Danish war was of comparatively slight importance by 
the side of contemporary events in Russia, whither the main interest 
of northern politics had transferred itself. Iwan the Terrible had 
been succeeded in 1584 by his eldest son Feodor, who was devoid 
both of his father’s energy and his vices. The government fell 
entirely into the hands of his brother-in-law, Boris Godunof, who 
aimed at securing the succession to himself. Demetrius, the Czar’s 
brother, and his sister, were got rid of by poison. With Feodor’s 
death in 1598, the male line of the house of Ruric came to an end. 
Boris Godunof now reaped the fruit of his ambition and his crimes, 
and became Czar. But he was not allowed to enjoy his ill-gotten 
power in peace. A pretender appeared, who claimed to be the 
brother of the late Czar, and who is known to fame as the False 
Demetrius. He applied for aid to Poland, married a Polish wife, 
and offered to become a Roman Catholic. Sigismund III. eagerly 
grasped at this opportunity of obtaining in Russia some compensa- 
tion for his loss of Sweden. Demetrius marched into Russia, 
where he was welcomed by the people and placed upon the throne. 
Boris Godunof, overwhelmed with remorse for his fruitless crime, 
died in the moment of defeat (1605). But the establishment of 
Polish influence in Russia was a serious danger to Sweden. Charles 
IX. allied himself with the leader of the party opposed to 
Demetrius, Vassily Shouisky, a distant relative of the main line of 
Ruric. A revolution was successfully conducted in Moscow, in 
which the pretender perished and Shouisky became Czar (1606). He 
at once made important cessions of territory to Charles [X., in return 
for which he obtained the support of a Swedish army. But the 
Poles were not inclined to submit to this reverse. A new pretender, 
the second False Demetrius, was brought forward and supported by a 
large Polish force. The quarrel between Sweden and Poland was 
thus transferred altogether to Russian soil. In 1610 the Poles took 
Moscow, drove Vassily Shouisky from the throne to a cloister, and 
compelled the election of Ladislaus, Sigismund’s son. The danger 
of the union of Poland and Russia roused the Swedish king to make 
great efforts. His troops took Novgorod, and it was proposed to 
confer the crown of the Czars upon Charles Philip, the younger 
brother of Gustavus Adolphus. Thus the contest between Charles 
and Sigismund took a new phase: it was no longer a question as 
to which should rule in Sweden, but whether Russia should be 
annexed to Sweden or to Poland. The Poles had the capital and 


190 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. XII. 


the best of the position, and might have proved successful but for 
Sigismund’s ambition to become Czar himself instead of his son. 
As it was, the pretensions of the rival dynasties were foiled by the 
rise of a patriotic party in Russia, which determined to submit to 
no foreign rule, and in 1613 elected Michael Romanof, the ancestor 
of the later Russian Czars. But the war was by no means ended 
by this election. ussia had to purchase its independence by large 
cessions of territory to the two powers whom internal dissensions 
had introduced. In 1617 peace was made with Sweden, and a 
truce for fourteen years with Poland. Before the expiration of the 
truce, Sigismund III., whose religious policy had caused such 
disturbances in northern Europe, died in 1682, leaving the Polish 
crown to his son Ladislaus. The Russians seized the opportunity 
to renew the war against Poland, but they were defeated, and in 
1634 peace was made on the same terms as the truce of 1617. 

§ 16. Gustavus Adolphus triumphantly announced to his estates 
the terms of his treaty with Russia, and declared that that enemy 
could not launch a single boat on the Baltic without the leave of 
Sweden. He now devoted himself for a time to domestic govern- 
ment. The nobles were compelled to fulfil their military duties, 
the neglect of which had caused the disasters of the Danish war. 
Constitutional institutions were established and regulated, but at the 
same time the power of the crown was secured. The financial 
system was reorganised. All the time Gustavus was watching 
closely the course of affairs in Germany, where the Thirty Years’ 
War broke out in 1618. He was enthusiastic for the success of the 
Protestant cause, and he married the sister of the elector of 
Brandenburg, one of the chief Lutheran princes of Germany. 
In 1620 the war against Poland began afresh. Sigismund III. 
was anxious to obtain Esthonia, even if he could not get the 
Swedish crown. But Gustavus speedily took the aggressive and 
carried the war into the Polish territory of Livonia. It was in 
these campaigns that he developed the military ability which was 
afterwards to be displayed on a wider stage. In 1624 he was 
anxious to interfere in Germany, but had to give way to the more 
sanguine schemes of Christian IV. of Denmark. He continued the 
Polish war, which served as a diversion in favour of the Protestants, 
because Sigismund IIT. received support from his ally the emperor. 
At last the failure of the Danish king and the peace of Liibeck 
opened the way for Swedish intervention in the European war. 
Wallenstein’s schemes for establishing the imperial power on the 
Baltic threatened the most vital interests of Sweden. French 
mediation enabled Gustavus to conclude the truce of Altmark with 
Poland, by which he obtained almost the whole of Livonia and great 


A.D. 1613-1648. CHRISTINA OF SWEDEN. 191 


part of Polish Prussia. In 1629 he landed in Pomerania and 
commenced those brilliant campaigns which completely changed 
the aspect of European politics and secured him everlasting fame, 
and which were closed by his premature but glorious death on the 
field of Liitzen (1632). 

§ 17. The Swedish crown now passed to Gustavus’ infant daughter, 
Christina. During her minority an oligarchical government was 
established, with the chancellor Oxenstiern as its head. The 
domestic policy of Gustavus was continued, but the government 
was mainly occupied with the European war. The alliances with 
France and the German princes were renewed, and in 1635 the 
prolongation of the truce with Poland was purchased by the cession 
of that part of Polish Prussia which Gustavus had obtained in 1629. 
Livonia was left in the hands of Sweden. While the Swedes were 
busied with military operations in Germany and Bohemia, they 
were interrupted by the manifest hostility of Christian IV. of 
Denmark. It was determined to anticipate an invasion of Sweden 
by attacking Denmark, and Torstenson was recalled to conduct the 
campaign. So unprepared were the Danes for defence, and so 
weakened was their kingdom by the independence of the nobles, 
that no resistance could be made. Christian was compelled to 
accept the humiliating treaty of Brémsebro in 1645. By this, 
Swedish vessels were freed from the tolls which the Danes 
levied in the Sound, and Denmark ceded Oesel, Halland, Jam- 
teland and the island of Gothland. Three years later the Thirty 
Years’ War was concluded by the peace of Westphalia, and the 
scheme of Gustavus Adolphus to establish Swedish supremacy 
over the Baltic was realised by the acquisition of the greater part 
of Pomerania. 

Christina had personally undertaken the government in 1644 at 
the age of eighteen. She had received an education which fitted 
her for the performance of a man’s duties, and she displayed great 
talent and inclination for business. She possessed a considerable 
knowledge of languages and literature, and took great interest in 
philosophical and theological questions. Grotius, Vossius, and 
Descartes were among the distinguished men who were attracted to 
her court at Stockholm. It was of great importance that she 
should have an heir, and the Swedes urged her to marry her cousin, 
Charles Gustavus of Zweibriicken, son of a sister of Gustavus 
Adolphus. But Christina refused to take a husband, and compelled 
the states, against their will, to recognise her cousin as her heir. 
Soon afterwards her religious belief was shaken by her philosophical 
researches, and at last she determined to escape from doubts by 
adopting Roman Catholicism. But the constitution of Sweden under 


192 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. XII. 


the Vasas was based upon Protestantism, and the country could 
never submit to a Catholic queen. Christina made up her mind to 
abdicate, and carried out her resolution with characteristic obstinacy. 
The extravagance of her government had provéd almost as 
expensive as the recent war, and this may have made her subjects 
less unwilling to part with her. After making arrangements for 
receiving a liberal pension and freeing herself from the crown debts, 
she left Sweden in 1654, and soon afterwards publicly declared 
herself a convert to Roman Catholicism. After spending several 
years in travelling about Europe, she ultimately settled in Rome, 
where she surrounded herself with literary society, and where she 
died in 1689. Her eccentric character, her abdication while in the 
prime of life, her subsequent adventures and literary tastes have 
combined to give her a reputation which her actions hardly 
deserved. 

§ 18. The crown which Christina had so lightly parted with passed 
to her cousin Charles X., “the Pyrrhus of the North.” His reign 
lasted barely six years, but during that period his ambition gave rise 
to a turmoil in which all the northern states were involved, and which 
was watched with interest by the whole of Europe. In the general 
confusion, it is a relief to find one power which was consistent in 
aim though not in conduct. This was Brandenburg, where Frederick 
William, the Great Elector, had begun to rule in 1640. He found 
his territories in the most deplorable}condition, caused mainly by 
the vacillating policy of his father in the Thirty Years’ War. The 
various provinces were under no common government, and the 
duchy of Prussia, which had fallen into the hands of the electoral 
line in 1611 was still subject to the suzerainty of Poland. To rid 
himself of this suzerainty was one of the elector’s chief objects. He 
was naturally opposed to Sweden, because he had a valid claim to 
Pomerania, of which only part had been given him by the peace of 
Westphalia. Though he had received ample compensation for the 
part which had been ceded to Sweden, he never relinquished the 
hope of obtaining the whole province. He, too, was ambitious to 
secure that dominant position on the Baltic which was the common 
aim of all the northern states. But the independence of Prussia 
was a more immediate and feasible object, and it was this that 
regulated his policy in these years. At first he remained neutral, 
then he joined Poland against Sweden, then he made a close alliance 
with the latter power, and finally deserted it. These abrupt: but well- 
timed variations of policy were attended with complete success. 

Charles X. had served under Torstenson in the later years of the 
great war, and was anxious to find a field on which to display the 
military ability which he had thus acquired. He determined to 


A.D. 1654-1656. CHARLES X. OF SWEDEN 193 


complete the Swedish ascendancy on the Baltic, towards which 
great strides had been already made. There were three states which 
he might attack; Poland, the old rival of Sweden, which was now 
ruled by John Casimir, the second son of Sigismund III. ; Denmark, 
which held the entrances into the Baltic; and Brandenburg, whose 
territories separated the Swedish possessions in Pomerania and 
Livonia. The question as towhich should be invaded depended on the 
first pretext for war, and this was afforded by Poland. John Casimir, 
who maintained the right to the Swedish crown of the elder branch 
of the house Vasa, refused to recognise Charles. Poland was already 
hampered by a war with Russia and offered an easy prey. In 1641 
Alexis, the second Czar of the Romanof line, had taken advantage 
of a quarrel between Poland and the Cossacks of the Ukraine to 
recover the territories extorted from Russia in 1617 and to invade 
Lithuania. In 1656 three Swedish armies invaded Poland and carried 
all before them. John Casimir fled to Silesia. After a campaign that 
resembled a triumphal progress, Charles X. found himself complete 
master of Poland. ‘This sudden success roused the misgivings of the 
elector of Brandenburg, who had refused to ally himself with Sweden, 
and hoped to see the two powers destroy each other. He now 
prepared for war in the interests of Poland, but Charles, with 
marvellous rapidity, was upon him before he could move. The 
Swedish invasion forced Frederick William to conclude the treaty 
of Kénigsberg (Jan. 1656), by which he agreed to hold Prussia of 
Sweden, as formerly of Poland, and to send auxiliaries to Charles’s 
army. 

Charles X. was now at the height of his power. But his success 
was too rapid to be lasting. He had no real hold on the kingdom 
which he had conquered. Brandenburg was only his ally by 
compulsion, and could not be trusted. The Russians regarded the 
Swedish victories as an obstacle to their own advance, and were 
as ready to fight the Swedes as the Poles. The Dutch were afraid 
of the Swedish power on the Baltic, as dangerous to their commerce. 
The empercr had good cause to hate and fear the Swedish king, and 
prepared to resist this new Gustavus Adolphus. Charles X.’s only 
ally was England, and Cromwell, though he favoured Sweden out of 
hostility to Holland, was unwilling to render any active assistance. 
While the aspect of affairs in Europe was so unfavourable, the Poles 
rose against their conquerors and recalled John Casimir. Charles X. 
hurried to confront the danger, but found himself opposed by over- 
whelming numbers, and was forced to retreat. To recover the lost 
eround the assistance of Brandenburg was essential, and Charles now 
offered to cede a great part of Poland to the elector. This was settled 
by the treaty of Marienburg (June, 1656). The combined armies of 

10* 


194 MODERN EUROPE. Cap. xi 


Sweden and Brandenburg marched to Warsaw, where they com- 
pletely defeated John Casimir, who again fled from the kingdom. But 
this great victory produced no commensurate results. The elector 
was still cool in his alliance with Sweden, and was evidently anxious 
to prevent rather than to further the success of Charles’ schemes. 
The king determined by new sacrifices to bind his ally closer to 
his interests, and in November, 1656, a new treaty with Branden- 
burg was concluded at Labiau, the third that had been made 
within the year. By this the duchy of Prussia was ceded to 
Frederick William in entire independence, and the succession secured 
to his descendants. But this was too late to decide the fortunes of 
the war. Sweden had embarked in an enterprise which proved 
beyond its strength, and had aroused enemies on every side. The 
Russians had declared open war, and concluded a treaty at Wilna 
(Nov. 1656) with the Poles. The emperor Ferdinand III. had 
espoused the cause of John Casimir. The Danish king, Frederick III., 
Was preparing for war against Sweden. To meet these powerful 
enemies Charles X. enlisted the support of George Ragocsky, Prince 
of Transylvania, in conjunction with whom he proceeded to attack 
the Russians in Lithuania. At this juncture the news reached him 
that the Danes, in alliance with the emperor and the Dutch, had 
commenced the long-threatened war against Sweden by a naval 
attack on Gothenburg. He at once determined to give up the 
prospect of distant conquests to meet this danger so near home. 
His departure disgusted Ragocsky, who returned at once to 
Transylvania. At the same time Sweden lost a far more important 
ally. The elector of Brandenburg, whose guiding motive was an 
enlightened self-interest, saw that nothing was to be gained from 
Charles X. when he ceased to be victorious. He now turned to John 
Casimir, who was only too glad to purchase so powerful a friend. 
In February, 1657, the treaty of Wehlau was arranged, by which 
Poland and Brandenburg concluded an offensive and defensive 
alliance against Sweden. Frederick William engaged to restore all 
conquests, and in return he was to receive Prussia free from all 
claims of Polish suzerainty. In default of male heirs the province 
was to return to Poland. Thus a great step was taken towards the 
formation of the Prussian monarchy. 

§ 19. Undismayed by these disasters, Charles X. displayed an 
activity that roused the astonished admiration of Europe, and in June 
appeared on the frontiers of Holstein. ‘The Danish monarchy was 
no stronger than in 1644, and no preparations had been made for 
defence. The mainland provinces, Holstein, Schleswig and Jut- 
land, were speedily overrun. But the main strength of the Danes 
lay in their islands, and the winter was now far advanced. Charles 


AD. 1656-1661. NORTHERN WAR. 195 


decided on a daring movement which still extorts wonder. He 
crossed the little Belt on the ice into Fiinen, defeated the Danish 
troops, and took the capital, Odensee. Without delay he effected 
the more dangerous passage of the Great Belt into Zealand, and 
threatened Copenhagen. Frederick II. could make no resistance, 
The ice which gave admission to his enemies prevented the arrival 
of the Dutch fleet to his aid. By the mediation of France and 
England a treaty was concluded at Roeskilde (Feb. 1658). 
Denmark ceded all her possessions on the northern peninsula, 
Skaania, Halland, etc., and agreed to close the Baltic against all 
enemies of Sweden. Thus Sweden obtained a geographical unity 
which it had never yet possessed. But the treaty was not destined 
to be observed by either party. The Danes accepted the 
humiliating terms only to escape from the immediate danger, and 
Charles X. was resolved on the complete subjection of a neighbour 
that must always be dangerous. His successes in the recent 
campaign had enabled him to conclude a three years’ truce with 
Russia, and before the end of the year he renewed the war against 
Denmark. But Frederick III. had now the assistance of his 
continental allies. The Dutch fleet brought provisions to 
Copenhagen, which was besieged by the Swedes. At the same time 
Frederick William of Brandenburg led an army which contained 
imperial troops into-Jutland. It was only the inability of the 
Germans to cross the Belt that saved Charles X. from being crushed 
between two hostile forces before Copenhagen. From Jutland the 
elector marched to Pomerania and Prussia, and in 1659 the Swedes 
were driven from all their conquests on the continent. In spite of 
Charles’ obstinate determination to hold out to the last, it was 
obvious that peace could not be long deferred. In February, 1660, 
the last obstacle was removed by the death of the warlike king at 
Gothenburg. The mediation of England, France and Holland was 
successfully employed. In May a treaty was concluded at Oliva 
between Sweden and Poland and Brandenburg: John Casimir 
renounced all claims to the crown of Sweden, and renewed the 
cession of Livonia. All conquests were restored, and the indepen- 
dent possession of Prussia was confirmed to the Great Elector. In 
June the Danish war was closed by the treaty of Copenhagen. 
Its terms were essentially the same as those of Roeskilde, with the 
exception that the clause about the exclusion of hostile vessels 
from the Baltic was omitted, and that one or two small pieces 
of territory were restored to Denmark. The general pacification of 
the north was completed in 1661 by the peace of Kardis between 
Sweden and Russia, which made no territorial changes, but merely 
secured the mutual restitution of conquests. 


196 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. xm. 


§ 20. Denmark was left.in a most deplorable condition by the treaty 
of Copenhagen. ‘The territorial losses were not so serious as the 
internal disunion that had made them inevitable. The crown was 
strictly elective, and the nobles had been able to extort such 
privileges from each successive king on his accession that their 
power completely overshadowed the monarchy. Though they 
possessed two thirds of the wealth of the country, they were 
exempt from all taxes, and selfishly refused to contribute even in 
the time of invasion. But by this they aroused the hostility of 
the other classes, which combined with the crown against them. 
In 1660 a diet met at Copenhagen, where a great revolution was 
effected by the action of the clergy and the burghers. The nobles 
were forced to pay their share of the expenses of the Government. 
The crown was made hereditary for females as well as males, 
and the capitulation which the king bad signed was abrogated. 
The opposition of the nobles to these measures was overcome by 
intimidation. Thus the extremity of the evil produced a cure. 
Frederick IIL., from being one of the most powerless sovereigns in 
Europe, became suddenly the most despotic. ‘The whole aaminis- 
trative system was reorganised, and brought wholly under royal 
control. 

§ 21. Very different was the state of things in Sweden. Charles 
X.’s death left the crown to his son Charles XI. an infant of four 
years. During the minority a council of regency was formed with 
the queen-mother as its head. The nobles took advantage of the 
opportunity to rule in their own interests. The domain-lands were 
squandered in reckless grants. All the financial reforms of the 
late king were given up. Sweden seemed likely to fall into the 
very condition from which Denmark had just emerged. To fill the 
empty treasury, the regency fell into the fatal practice of receiving 
subsidies from foreign powers. It was the hope of English gold 
that induced Sweden to become a party to the Triple Alliance 
against: France in 1668. But the great master of the art of 
purchasing allies was Louis XTV., and he was as ready to take 
advantage of the mercenary character of the Swedish government 
as he was of England. Just as he was commencing his unjust war 
against the Dutch in 1672, he concluded an alliance with Sweden. 
In this year Charles XI. assumed the government in person, but 
found himself hampered by the actions of the regency. The 
elector of Brandenburg had undertaken to support the Dutch, and 
was leading armies against: the French in Alsace. Louis now 
called on the king of Sweden to fulfil his engagements and to effect 
a diversion in Germany. A Swedish army under Wrangel 
marched from Pomerania into Brandenburg and oceupied several 


A.p. 1660-1679. SWEDEN AND BRANDENBURG. 197 


strong places. The Great Elector heard of the invasion not without 
pleasure, as he hoped with this pretext to drive the Swedes from 
Pomerania. Leaving the Rhine, he reached his own territories 
by a series of forced marches, fell upon the surprised enemy at 
Fehrbellin and inflicted a crushing defeat upon them. Following 
up his success, he drove the Swedes from the electorate, and 
proceeded to effect his great object in the war, the conquest 
of Pomerania. His success gained him allies. Holland and the 
emperor were on his side as common enemies of France. And now 
Denmark, where Christian V. had succeeded Frederic III. in 1670, 
determined to make war on Sweden in order to recover the 
territories lost by the treaty of Copenhagen. Charles XI. whose 
qualities were as yet little known, displayed all the firmness 
and energy that characterised his family. The Danes landed in 
Skaania, hoping to revive the ancient loyalty of that province to its 
former rulers. But they were defeated by Charles in the battles of 
Lund (1676) and Landskrona (1677), while an invasion from the - 
side of Norway was repulsed. But by sea the Danish fleet, assisted 
by the Dutch under Tromp, was completely successful, and drove the 
Swedes from the Baltic. At the same time the Great Elector 
completed the subjection of Pomerania. In 1677 he took Stettin, 
and in the next year Stralsund and Greifswald. But these 
successes proved ultimately useless. The European war, out of 
which this northern conflict had arisen, was concluded by the 
peace of Nimwegen, and in 1679 the treaty of St. Germain-en-Laye 
was forced upon Sweden and Brandenburg by French intervention. 
Louis XIV. insisted that his allies the Swedes should lose nothing 
by supporting him, and treated with lofty scorn the remoustrances 
of the elector. The whole of Pomerania, with the exception of a 
small district, had to be restored. A few months later peace 
between Sweden and Denmark was concluded at Lund on the basis 
of the treaty of Copenhagen. Thus Sweden emerged out of an 
unsuccessful war without any loss of territory. But the military 
prestige which it had enjoyed under Gustavus Adolphus and 
Charles X. was weakened if not destroyed. These reverses, how- 
ever, led in Sweden, as in Denmark, to a reform of the constitution. 
Clergy and commons combined with the king azainst the nobles. 
The domain lands which had been so recklessly distributed under 
the regency, had to be restored. ‘The royal power was made 
absolute, and the council, which had so long been a check, now 
became the mere creature of the king’s will. Charles XI. carried 
out these changes with resolution and severity, but he could plead 
the interests of the people. Under the new government manufactures 
and commerce revived, and the army and navy were reorganised. 


198 MODERN EUROPE. Cwap. xm, 


The aggressive policy of his predecessors was given up by Charles XI. 


No more subsidies were received, and France was unable to — 


entangle Sweden in its European wars. This beneficent, though 
scarcely popular government, continued till Charles’ death in 1697, 
when a new era commenced for Sweden with the accession of 
Charles XII. Denmark during this time had also an uneventful 
history. Christian V. ruled till 1699, and endeavoured to model 
his court on that of Versailles. This ambition involved great 
expense, and the king sought to obtain supplies by hirmg out 
Danish troops to foreign powers.. His kingdom had to suffer for 
his extravagance, but less than they would have done from a 
renewal of war. Even the hereditary hostility towards Sweden 
was allowed to cool during this period of tranquillity. 

§ 22. The war between Poland and Russia, which had been com- 
menced by troubles in the Ukraine, was continued after the Swedes 
had withdrawn from it by the treaty of Kardis (1661). In 1667 a 
truce was concluded at Andrussov, by which the Ukraine was divided. 
Russia received the whole territory to the left of the Dnieper, 
and Smolensk and Kiev on the right bank. John Casimir had 
alienated his subjects by his ill-success in war, and by his partiality 
for France. In 1669 he abdicated, and thus closed the long and 
famous rule of the Jagellon line. ‘The Polish nobles were divided 
into a French and German party, but ultimately their choice fell 
on one of themselves, Michael Wisnowiecky. Under him Poland 
became involved in a war with the Turks, and in 1673 the king’s 
death produced new disputes as to his successor. Ultimately the 
foreign candidates were rejected, and the famous general, John 
Sobieski, was raised to the throne. He closed the Turkish war 
in 1677 by the cession of part of the Ukraine, which three years 
later the Porte had to resign to Russia. Soon afterwards a 
second war broke out with Turkey, in which Sobieski gained 
eternal fame by the relief of Vienna in 1683. But this was 
his greatest success. He enlisted the Russians against the Turks 
by a treaty in 1686, which confirmed the terms of the truce of 
Andrussov. But the allies reaped more advantage than the Poles 
from the war, of which Sobieski did not live to see the conchision. 
His death in 1697 renewed the old quarrels among the Polish 
nobles. The two candidates were the Prince of Conti and the 
elector of Saxony, Augustus the Strong. Louis XIV. had always 
been jealous of the House of Condé, and though anxious for the 
success of the French claimant, failed to use all his influence on his 
behalf. The result was that the German faction carried the day, 
and Augustus was elected king of Poland. To obtain the crown he 
deserted the faith of his ancestors and became a Roman Catholic. 


ee  — a, ae ee 


A.D. 1667-1689. THE OTTOMAN. TURKS. 199 


Meanwhile Peter the Great nad ascended the throne of the 
Czars in 1682. For seven years the government was exercised by 
his sister Sophia, but in 1689 Peter began to rule independently. 
His reign marks an epoch in the history, not only of Russia, but of 
Europe. But before considering it, it is necessary to turn to the 
history of the Turks, who now became involved in the disputes 
of the northern states. 


Ill, Tae Orroman Turks. 


§ 23. The Ottoman empire attained the zenith of its greatness 
under Solyman the Magnificent (1513-1566), the: contemporary 
and rival of Charles V. and Francis J. One of his first acts was 
the capture of Rhodes, the outpost of Roman Catholicism in the 
Levant, from which the Knights of St. John retired to Malta. In 
1521 he took Belgrad, before the walls of which John Huniades 
had checked the victorious career of Mohammed the Conqueror. 
Five years later he defeated and slew the last Jagellon king of 
Hungary in the battle of Mohacz. The Hungarian crown passed to 
Ferdinand of Austria, to be contested with John Zapolya, but the 
Sultan obtained more territory in the kingdom than either of the rival 
claimants. In 1529 Turkish troops advanced to the walls of Vienna, 
but failed, as they did a century and a half later, to reduce the 
Austrian capital. The naval empire of the Turks was extended 
over the Mediterranean and the northern coasts of Africa by the 
enterprise of admirals like Barbarossa and Dragut. In 1540 
Solyman forced the Venetians to cede to him their last fortresses 
in the Morea, and Greece was completely subjected to Ottoman 
rule. In alliance with Francis I., the ‘Turkish fleet laid siege to 
Nice, and spread consternation throughout Christendom. The 
greatness of the Ottoman power under Solyman was not merely 
territorial. Several provinces, such as Cyprus and Crete, were 
annexed in later times. But the moral energies of the empire 
were never so conspicuous afterwards. Solyman himself, spite 
of the cruelties characteristic of his race and age, was a ruler 
who may compare favourably with any of his contemporaries. 
And the Turkish rule, with its disregard of doctrinal differences, 
had positive merits in a period of religious strife and persecution. 
We know that conquest by the heathens was absolutely preferred 
by many of the subjects of Christian powers like Austria and 
Venice. “The Turkish dominion, at the period of its greatest 
extension, stretched from Buda on the Danube to Bussora on the 
Euphrates. On the north their frontiers were guarded against the 
Poles by the fortress of Kamenietz, and against the Russians by the 


200 . MODERN EUROPE. . CHAP. XII. 


walls of Azof; while to the south the rock of Aden secured their 
authority over the southern coast of Arabia, invested them with power 
in the Indian Ocean, and gave them the complete command of the 
Red Sea. ‘To the east, the Sultan ruled the shores of the Caspian, 
from the Kour to the Tenek; and his dominions stretched west- 
ward along the southern coast of the Mediterranean, where the 
farthest limits of the regency of Algiers, beyond Oran, meets the 
frontiers of the empire of Morocco. By rapid steps the Ottomans 
completed the conquest of the Seljouk sultans in Asia Minor, of 
the Mamlouk sultans of Syria and Egypt, of the fierce corsairs of 
Northern Africa, expelled the Venetians from Cyprus, Crete, and 
the Archipelago, and drove the Knights of St. John of Jerusalem 
from the Levant, to find a shelter at Malta. It was no vain boast 
of the Ottoman sultan, that he was the master of many kingdoms, 
the ruler of three continents, and the lord of two seas.” 4 

§ 24. The decline of the ‘Turkish power commenced even during 
Solyman’s lifetime. In 1565 a determined attack on Malta was 
repulsed by the heroic resistance of the knights, and it was a poor 
compensation that Chios was taken in the next year from the 
powerless hands of its Genoese rulers. ‘The Sultan determined to 
retrieve the credit of his arms by a great effort in Hungary. But 
the small fortress of Szigeth checked his advance, and under its 
walls the last of the great Ottoman rulers died (1566.). From this 
time the Turkish decline becomes more and more rapid, and its 
causes are not far to seek. Hitherto the Sultans, with the single 
exception of Bajazet II., had all been men of marked energy and 
ability. Their successors degenerate with marvellous rapidity. 
The Sultans no longer appear at the head of their armies. Absorbed 
in brutal sensuality, they resign the cares and duties of government 
to viziers and other officials, who rule for the most part for their own 
interest and avarice. Venality, the curse of Ottoman public life, 
spreads into every department of government, and especially into 
the administration of justice. The rule which had once been 
welcomed by the subject races as preferable to that of their fellow 
Christians becomes a barbarous and hideous despotism. And this 
internal decay was accompanied by the decline of those military 
institutions on which the Ottoman empire had been built up. The 
rigid discipline, once so conspicuous in the Turkish army, was a 
thing of the past. The Janissaries became the oppressors instead 
of the defenders of the empire. They obtained the privilege to 
marry previously withheld from them, and under Selim II. 
admission to their ranks became hereditary for their children. 


1 Finlay, ‘ History of Greece,’ vol. y. p. 6. 


_ ts, | 


—— 


oa = 


ee ee eee hg ee 


A.D. 1565-1617. DECLINE OF THE TURKS. 201 


Thus their numbers increased from twelve thousand at the fall of 
Constantinople to more than a hundred thousand by the end of the 
16th century. ‘The tribute of children, the horrible expedient 
which had been so efficacious in enforcing submission and in train- 
ing servants for the monarchy, now ceased to be exacted. This was 
a great advantage for the conquered populations, but a very serious 
blow to the power of their rulers. 

Under Selim II. (1566-1574) the Ottoman power was still 
maintained, not by the Sultan himself but by the Grand Vizier, 
Sokolli, the last of the great officials who survived the period of 
Turkish success. Selim, who is known to history as “the Sot,” 
illustrates the decline of personal character and ability which makes 
the sultans of this period little more than names. His first act 
was to conclude a truce with Maximilian IL, leaving matters in 
Hungary and Transylvania as they stood. Fora long time after 
this north-eastern Europe remained undisturbed by Turkish wars. 
The great event of Selim’s reign was the attack on the Venetian 
island of Cyprus, an enterprise which was carried out against the 
advice of Sokolli by the influence of the favourite Lala Mustafa. 
The small force that was left to guard the island retired into the 
two fortresses of Nicosia and Famagosta. In 1570 the former was 
taken, and in the next year Famagosta had to yield after a heroic 
resistance. This new advance, and the cruelties with which the 
Turkish success was accompanied, roused for a moment something 
like the old crusading spirit in Western Europe. Pius V. concluded 
a Holy League with Spain and Venice. At the head of the 
allied forces, Don John of Austria won a great naval victory at 
Lepanto (October, 1571), the most famous and the most useless of 
all battles between the Cross and the Crescent. Selim II. displayed 
unexpected energy in repairing the losses of the Turkish fleet. In 
1573 Venice concluded a humiliating treaty, by which Cyprus was 
surrendered and 30,000 ducats were paid as compensation by the 
defeated power. In 1574 Tunis, which had been taken by Don 
John, was recovered, and the Turkish power re-established in Africa. 
Soon afterwards Selim died. 

§ 25. Under his son and successor, Amurath ILI. (1574-1595), the 
energies of the Turks were absorbed in a fourteen years’ war with 
Persia (1576-1590), in which territories were gained only to be lost 
again even more speedily to the famous Shah Abbas. Sokolli had 
been assassinated in 1579, and the office of vizier fell into incom- 
petent hands. The reigns of Mohammed III. (1596-1603), and of 
Achmet I. (1603-1617), are noteworthy only for the commencement 
of that female influence at the Porte which brought great disasters 
upon the empire, and for the growing insubordination of the 


202 MODERN EUROPE. Cnap, xn. 


Janissaries, who aspire to imitate the Prastorian bands at Rome and 
to direct the succession by their own will. A period of anarchy and 
confusion followed, until Amurath IV. (1623-1640), the Nero of the 
Turkish Sultans, restored some external order by a reign of terror. 

Ibrahim (1640-1648), who survived in spite of the politic rule 
which doomed the brothers of a Sultan to the bowstring, spent his 
life in brutal sensuality, and allowed all the worst abuses to revive 
after their momentary check. His reign, otherwise unimportant, is 
noteworthy for the commencement of the famous war of Candia 
between Venice and the Turks. A Turkish squadron on its way 
from Constantinople to Egypt was attacked and captured by a fleet 
from Malta. Ibrahim determined to revenge the insult, but was 
afraid to renew the war with the Knights of St. John which had 
ended so disastrously in 1565. He contented himself therefore with 
an attack on the Venetian island of Crete,-on the ground that the 
plunderers had found refuge in one of its harbours. In 1645 the war 
began which lasted twenty-five years, and in which the Venetians, 
though ultimately unsuccessful, displayed some of their old 
capacity for maritime warfare. But the republic was no real match 
for the Turkish power, and the war would have been terminated 
much sooner but for the internal dissensions at Constantinople. In 
1648 Ibrahim was deposed, and succeeded by his son Mohammed IV., 
who was only seven years old at the time, and during whose 
minority the government was contested for by his mother and his 
grandmother. During these years the Ottoman power sank to the 
lowest depths of anarchy and misrule. In 1656 the Venetians 
under Mocenigo won a naval victory in the Dardanelles and 
followed it up by the capture of Lemnos and Tenedos, 

§ 26. But in this very year a new era of Turkish history begins. 
The younger Sultana had been successful in the contest for supreme 
influence, and at her instance the office of Grand Vizier was 
conferred upon an Albanian, Mohammed Kiuprili. Though already 
seventy years old, he set himself with determined energy to the 
task of reform. Everywhere disorder was put down with unsparing 
severity. Discipline was restored among the Janissaries, and their 
military spirit was revived. The old Ottoman institutions were 
once more set in working, and under the Kiuprili family the Turkish 
empire obtained a new lease of life. Not content with internal 
reform, the Grand Vizier determined to embark once more on a 
career of foreign conquest. The war of Candia was prosecuted with 
renewed vigour, and in 1657 the Venetians were driven from their 
recent conquests. At the same time the Turks prepared to make 
their power again felt’ in the Danubian territories, which had 
enjoyed unaccustomed security for the last seventy years. The 


: ug 


a eee ee ee Ce ee eS ee ee ee 


AD. 1623-1664. BATTLE OF ST. GOTHARD. 203 


occasion for this enterprise was given by events in ‘Transylvania, 
the principality which had been formed by the Zapolyas under 
Turkish patronage, but which had now passed into other hands. 
The reigning prince, George Ragocsky II., in his greed for territorial 
aggrandisement, had.in 1656 joined Charles X. of Sweden against 
Poland. His campaign was utterly unsuccessful, but Kiuprili chose 
to treat it as an act of insubordination ina vassal of the Porte. He 
declared Ragocsky deposed, and ordered the estates to elect a 
successor. Resistance being deemed impossible, the estates had to 
choose Barezai, a nominee of the vizier. Ragocsky, however, 
refused to submit, and applied for assistance to the emperor. 
Although the princes of Transylvania had always been thorns in the 
side of the Hapsburgs, Leopold I. (1657-1705) was unwilling to 
see the province definitely annexed by the Turks, as his own 
subjects in Hungary were extremely discontented, and might easily 
be induced to prefer Turkish to Austrian rule. On the other hand, 
Ragocsky was distrusted as a recent enemy, and after some 
hesitation, Leopold contented himself with diplomatic intervention, 
which the Porte disregarded. TPagocsky now made a stand with the 
help of his own followers, but the vizier sent an army to enforce 
submission, and in 1660 the last Ragoesky who ruled Transylvania 
was slain in battle. His party still held out, and elected as prince 
John Kemenyi, who succeeded in capturing Barczai and putting 
him to death. With Kemenyi Leopold concluded a close alliance, 
and sent Montecuculi to defend Transylvania. Thus, after a 
century of peace, the empire was once more at war with the Turks. 
Montecuculi, hampered by orders from home, was unable to conduct 
a successful campaign. ‘The Porte put forward another nominee for 
the principality, Apasi, and in 1662 Kemenyi was killed. But 
Apasi himself was dissatisfied with his position. He saw that the 
real object of the Turks was to annex Transylvania, and opened 
secret negotiations with the emperor.. Thus secure of internal 
support, Leopold made great efforts to continue the war. Louis X1V., 
with that magnanimity which sat so easily upon him, sent 4000 
infantry and 2000 cavalry to aid against the infidel. In 1664 
Montecuculi found himself at the head of a commanding force. 
He was opposed by Achmet Kiuprili, who had succeeded his father 
as Grand Vizier in 1661, and who was eager to lead the Turks to 
the conquest of Vienna. At St. Gothard, on the right bank of the 
Raab, the two armies met on the Ist of August, 1664. Montecuculi 
won his greatest victory, and the Christian arms recovered the glory 
that had been lost in previous wars against the Ottomans. But the 
victory had no commensurate results. Leopold was anxious to 
terminate the war, and ten days after the battle a truce for twenty 


204 . MODERN EUROPE. ~ OCHap, xu. 


years was arranged at Vasvar. The imperial and Turkish armies 
were to evacuate ‘l'ransylvania, where Apasi was recognised as 
Prince and pledged himself to pay the accustomed tribute to the 
Sultan. ‘The treaty excited the greatest discontent in Hungary, and 
certainly the victory of St. Gothard entitled Leopold to demand 
better terms. All that he secured was the continued independence 
of Transylvania, while the Turks, in spite of their defeat, obtained 
accessions of territory. 

§ 27. This fortunate conclusion of the war enabled Achmet Kiuprili 
to devote undivided attention to the contest with Venice, which had 
dragged on for twenty years. At the end of 1666 he assumed the 
command of the army which was besieging Candia. ‘The garrison 
was commanded by Morosini, one of the few heroes whom Venice 
produced after the 15th century. For two years the obstinate 
defence was conducted with success. But the superior numbers of 
the Turks and the stern determination of the vizier were not to be 
denied, and in 1669 the fortress became untenable. Morosini took 
the opportunity to negotiate a peace which the republic unwillingly 
accepted. Candia was surrendered on the 17th of September, and 
Venice ceded the whole island to the Turks, with the exception of 
three fortresses, Karabusa, Suda, and Spinalonga, 

These successive pacifications only impelled Kiuprili to seek a 
new outlet for the military energies of the Turks, and this he found 
in a war with Poland. ‘The territory of the Ukraine, inhabited by 
the warlike tribes of the Cossacks, had long been contested for by 
Russia and Poland. By the truce of Andrussov in 1667, it had been 
divided between the two powers. ‘This arrangement was very 
distasteful to the Cossacks, who were eager to regain their unity and 
independence. In 1670, a movement of the Zaporogues, a tribe 
which dwelt by the mouths of the Boug and Dnieper, led to the 
despatch of a Polish army under Sobieski as general. The Hetman 
Doroschenko, made a vigorous resistance, and appealed for aid to the 
Porte. He hoped to become ruler of the united Cossacks under 
Turkish suzerainty. Kiuprili readily responded to the appeal, and in 
1672 collected an army, which was accompained by Mohammed IV. 
in person. Siege was laid to Kaminietz on the Dniester, which 
had to surrender, and the Polish province of Podolia was speedily 
overrun. The feeble king, Michael Wisniowiecky (1669-1673), 
hastened to conclude a treaty at Budziak, by which Podolia was 
ceded to the Porte and the Ukraine to the rebellious Hetman under 
Turkish suzerainty, and Poland promised an annual tribute of 
200,000 ducats. But the influence of Sobieski induced the Polish 
nobles to reject the treaty, and in 1673 he won a great victory over 
Kiuprili at Khoczim. In 1674 his heroism was rewarded by his 


7 


A.D. 1664-1676. DISCONTENT IN HUNGARY 205 


election to the Polish crown. But the Turks had the advantage of 
superior numbers, and in spite of another defeat at the hands of 
Sobieski at Lemberg (1675), they succeeded in regaining the mastery 
in Podolia. It was only the fear of a Russian war that induced the 
Turks to grant rather more lenient terms than those of 1672 in the 
treaty of Zurawna (Oct. 1676). By this the greater part of Podolia 
with Kamenietz was handed over to the Sultan, but on the other 
and, he gave up the tribute and also restored two-thirds of the Ukraine 
to Poland. 

§ 28. Meanwhile events had beenrtaking place in Hungary which 
were destined to involve the Porte in its most important and ulti- 
mately its most disastrous war of the century. ‘The modern kingdom 
of Hungary was at that time divided into three parts. In the west 
was the narrow strip of territory which was held by the Hapsburgs, 
and which was ruled by a Palatine, usually a native noble, with his 
seat of government at Pressburg on the Danube. In the south-east 
was the district which had been annexed by the Turks, and was 
directly subject to a pasha at Ofen, and in the north-east was 
Transylvania with its own elective princes, who owed allegiance to 
the Porte. It will be convenient to call the Austrian province 
Hungary, and the others respectively Turkish Hungary and Tran- 
sylvania. 

Hungary in the latter half. of the 17th century was in a state of 
perpetual revolt. There were two main causes of discontent ; 
religious persecution, and the arbitrary interference with the 
national rights and liberties as guaranteed by the coronation oath of 
each king. In most of the German principalities the treaty of 
Westphalia was followed by increased centralisation and despotism. 
The same thing is to be observed in the Austrian dominions. . The 
Hapsburgs, as heads of the Empire, had suffered a serious diminution 
of dignity and influence. For this they thought to compensate 
themselves by increasing their domestic power. Thus one of the 
results of the decline of the old Empire, was the rise of the modern 
state of Austria. But the measures adopted to bring this about 
were bitterly resentedin Hungary. ‘The office of Palatine was often 
left unfilled, and the government brought more and more directly 
under officials at Vienna. The Magyar language was discouraged, 
and the people felt that they were being deprived of their separate 
nationality. Still more serious were the religious motives for 
discontent. Protestantism had made great strides in Hungary, as 
in the other Hapsburg territories, in the later part of the 16th 
century. To repress this heresy Ferdinand II. had introduced 
the Jesuits, founded a University for them, and strove to give them 
complete control of the national education, Ferdinand IIL, when 


206 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. xr. 


the peace set his hands free, commenced a systematic persecution, 
which threatened Hungary with the same fate as had befallen 
Bohemia after its reduction in 1622. Leopold, in his coronation- 
oath, promised liberty of conscience, but the promise was never ful- 
filled. Like his predecessors he had been brought up by the Jesuits, 
and moreover had been destined for the church. The death of his 
elder brother gave him the throne, but he brought to it all the prepos- 
sessions of the priesthood. The suppression of heresy he regarded as 
his first duty, and his reign is the golden age of the Jesuits in 
Austria. 

The prevailing discontent was increased by the treaty of Vasvar, 
which was concluded without the consent of the diet, and which 
bought off the Turks from Transylvania at the expense of Hungary. 
The troops which had been employed in the war were still quartered 
in the province, and it was evident that they were left, not as a 
garrison, but as armed missionaries to assist the Jesuits in the work 
of conversion. A conspiracy was formed in 1666 by a number of 
the chief nobles, who employed as their tool Francis Ragoesky, a son 
of the late prince of Transylvania, George I]. But the conspiracy 
came to nothing through the failure to obtain foreign assistance. 
Achmet Kiuprili was absorbed in the siege of Candia. Louis XIV. 
was at this time on good terms with the government at Vienna. 
The emperor had early information of the plans of the rebels, but 
waited till they were fully invoived, and in 1670 put all the leaders 
to death with the exception of Ragocsky, who was allowed to retire 
into insignificance. 

§ 29. The suppression of the conspiracy was followed by a reign of 
terror in Hungary, of which Lobkowitz, Leopold’s minister, was 
the presiding genius. A special tribunal at Pressburg proceeded 
against the nobles with the illegal severity of martial law. ‘To 
support the military expenses, new taxes were imposed without any 
pretence of consulting the estates. The office of Palatine was 
abolished, and the executive power entrusted to a German official 
as governor-general. All the chief places were transferred from 
natives to foreigners. At the same time the opportunity was 
seized to complete the religious persecution. Protestant preachers 
were driven into exile or sent to the galleys. The only result of this 
severity must be a new and more formidable revolt. Many nobles 
and others escaped death by flying to Transylvania, where they 
concerted schemes for revenge. In 1674 the persecutor Lobkowitz 
was deprived of office on account of his subservience to France. 
But his fall brought with it no change in the system of government 
in Hungary and the projects of rebellion rapidly acquired 
consistency. An able and devoted leader was found in Emerich 


es iid 


ee = 


A.D. 1666—1681. RISING OF TOKOLI. 207 


Ték6li, whose father had been a friend of the nobles executed in 
1670. European affairs were more favourable to the second 
rebellion than to the first. Louis XIV. was now at open war with 
Leopold and had no scruples about supporting rebellion in the east. 
In 1674 John Sobieski had been elected king of Poland by the 
French and anti-Austrian party. Besides France and Poland, the 
Porte also favoured the movement. Achmet Kiuprili had died and 
had been succeeded by his son-in-law, Kara Mustafa, who was 
eager to win new laurels for the Ottoman arms. Apasi, prince 
of Transylvania, followed the lead of his suzerain, and had also 
personal interests on the same side. It was certain that if the 
Hapsburgs made themselves absolute in Hungary, their next object 
would be the annexation of Transylvania. 

Encouraged by the prospect of such powerful support, Tok6li and 
his followers took up arms. Four years of civil war ensued, in 
which the insurgents had on the whole the advantage. At one 
time To6kéli even threatened Pressburg. But the treaty of Nim- 
wegen restored the balance by releasing the imperial troops from 
the western war. In 1679 a truce was concluded, leaving matters 
as they stood, and the interval was occupied in negotiations. 
All the Hungarian advisers of Leopold urged a policy of concilia- 
tion, but his German ministers branded them as traitors. At 
last, however, the attitude of Louis XIV., who was commencing 
his famous réunions at the expense of Germany, forced concessions 
from the Austrian government. At the diet of didensburg in 1681 
the system of Lobkowitz was definitely abandoned. The office of 
Palatine was revived and given to Paul Esterhazy. The 
general-governorship was to be abolished for ever; the arbitrary 
taxes were withdrawn; and offices were henceforth to be held by 
natives. Still more important were the religious articles, which 
remained in force till the death of Charles VI. Both Calvinists and 
Lutherans were restored to their rights as citizens, and received 
liberty of conscience. In the free towns Protestants might build 
a church on some spot to be selected by the emperor. 

§30. These were ample concessions, but T6k6li and his associates 
refused to accept them. They maintained that as soon as the fear 
of French and Turkish intervention was past the old oppressions 
would be resumed. T6kéli now married the widow of Francis 
Ragocsky, who had died in 1676. By this marriage not only did 
he obtain great wealth, but he became the guardian of a second 
Francis Ragocsky, his stepson, and succeeded to the popularity and 
influence which this family still enjoyed in Transylvania. At the 
same time he drew closer his alliance with the Turks, and the 
Sultan nominated him Prince of Hungary: The emperor made 


208 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. xIL. 


a last effort to maintain the treaty of Vasvar. But the Porte 
purposely made demands too insulting to be accepted, and a new 
war broke out between Austria and the Turks. 

In March, 1683, Mohammed LY. assembled an enormous army 
at Adrianople. He himself advanced with it as far as Belgrad, 
where he handed over the command to Kara Mustafa. At Essek, 
TOk6li joined the Turks and was received with royal honours. 
There could be no doubt that the destination of the army was 
Vienna. Charles IV. of Lorraine, with the imperial forces, was 
covering Hungary, but as soon as he heard of the Turkish 
intentions, he hastened to throw reinforcements into the capital. 
The command of the garrison was undertaken by Count Gundaker 
Stahremberg, a member of a family that has rendered conspicuous 
military services to Austria. Under his directions the suburbs were 
burnt to the ground, and the efforts of the defenders were 
concentrated on the city walls. . Leopold himself had fled with his 
family and treasure up the Danube to Linz. 

The second siege of Vienna is a memorable event in the history 
of Europe. The Ottoman power, after a long decline, had been 
revived by the family of Kiuprili. The year 1683 was decisive as 
to the permanence of the revival. If Vienna had fallen it is not easy 
to imagine what would have been the future of Europe. One of two 
events appears the more probable. Hither the Turkish empire 
would have been permanently extended to the Rhine with fatal 
results to European civilisation. Or Louis XIV. would have 
waited for the collapse of Austria to pose as the champion of 
Christendom. If he had succeeded in driving back the Turks, his 
dream of a Bourbon monarchy over Europe would have been 
realised. 

It is worth while to review quickly the state of Europe at this 
crisis. Spain was the emperor’s natural ally. But the Spanish 
monarchy had suffered so terribly, both from internal decay, and 
from external attack, that it was unable to give any effective 
assistance. In Italy, Venice was the only independent state of 
any importance, and the republic had sunk into impotent inactivity 
after the close of the Candian war. The Pope, Innocent XI., the 
enemy of Louis XIV., was devoted to the imperial cause, but the 
temporal power ef the papacy did not count for much, and its 
ecclesiastical authority was narrowly restricted. Portugal was 
only too glad to enjoy its independence to risk it by intervention in 
a European war. England under Charles II. had sunk altogether 
from the position to which Cromwell had raised it. Holland was 
absorbed in watchful hostility to France. Sweden was too 
Protestant to assist such an emperor as Leopold, and moreover 


A.D. 1683. THE SIEGE OF VIENNA. 209 


a false step would enable Brandenburg to seize Pomerania. 
Germany was as usual divided, and the western princes were 
occupied in watching Louis XLV., who had just seized Strasburg 
(1681), and was planning further acquisitions eastwards. There 
was only one power left, Poland, ruled by John Sobieski, who had 
already earned a great reputation by the victories of Khoczim and 
Lemberg. But then Sobieski was avowedly a partisan of France, 
and France was more or less openly encouraging the Turks. More- 
over, the Polish constitution, with its unlimited opportunities for 
obstruction, made it difficult for the king to take part in a war 
which did not immediately concern the national interests. Sobieski 
had also a personal grievance against Leopold, who had refused 
him the title of Majesty on the ground that he was an elected 
and not an hereditary king. In spite of these considerations, 
Leopold applied to Poland for aid and obtained it. Sobieski’s 
wife, a Frenchwoman, had recently been alienated by Louis, and 
the discovery of some letters of the French envoy, which spoke 
contemptuously of Polish venality, and disclosed a plot for the 
king’s deposition, removed all difficulty with the diet. Poland 
promised to furnish 40,000 troops against the Turks which 
Sobieski was to command in person. 

Meanwhile Vienna was besieged. It might have been taken 
with ease but for the delay of the Vizier, who wasted fourteen 
days over a march that might have been completed in two. This 
enabled Stahremberg to complete his plans for the defence. It was 
not till the 24th of July that Kara Mustafa appeared before the 
city with his whole army, over 200,000 men. The great siege 
lasted till the 12th of September. Several times the Turkish 
mines made great breaches in the walls, and the city was on the 
verge of being taken by assault. But each time the invaders were 
repulsed and the damage repaired. At last on the 10th of 
September the relieving army appeared on the neighbouring hill, 
the Kahlenberg. Sobieski and his Poles had effected a junction 
with Charles of Lorraine, and had also been reinforced by troops 
from Bavaria and Saxony. Kara Mustafa, confident in his over- 
whelming numbers, decided to risk a battle and to continue the 
siege at the same time. On the 12th the decisive conflict took 
place. The ‘lurks were completely defeated, and fled in confusion, 
leaving enormous booty behind them. On the 14th the emperor 
arrived and held his famous interview with Sobieski. 

A few days after the great victory of Vienna, Sobieski and the 
duke of Lorraine advanced to attack the Turks in Hungary. <At 
Parkani, on the 7th October, the Poles, who were in the van, suffered 
defeat. But the arrival of the imperialists stopped their retreat, 


1g | 


210 MODERN EUROPE. GHAP. xiz: 


and two days later they won a complete victory. This was 
followed by the capture of Gran, which the Turks had held for 
seventy-four years. After these great successes, which have given 
him imperishable fame, Sobieski returned to Poland. The Grand 
Vizier, Kara Mustafa, who was responsible for the campaign of 
1683, paid the penalty of his unsuccessful ambition. At Belgrad 
the envoy of the Sultan met him with the fatal bowstring, and he 
was put to death. With his fall ended the great impulse which 
the Kiuprili family had given to the Turkish power. 

§ 81. The war between Austria and the Turks lasted for fourteen 
years. The imperialists found able and successful leaders in Charles of 
Lorraine, Lewis of Baden, and Eugene of Savoy. It is noteworthy 
that all of them, like Montecuculi, were foreigners. The great 
success of 1683 had aroused. the enthusiasm of Europe, and the 
war has some of the characteristics of the mediaval crusades. The 
empire sent assistance to its head, and Venice once more came 
forward in the cause of Christendom. [arly in 1684 the “holy 
league” was concluded by papal mediation between the emperor 
and the republic. 1t was the first time in its history that Venice 
had taken the initiative against the Turks. Under Morosini their 
armies invaded the Morea, and reduced the greater part of it. 
Besides the formal allies of the empire, volunteers flocked to join 
the Christian army from all parts of Europe. The only exception 
to the general crusading impulse was France. The Most Christian 
King was eager to have his hands free on the Rhine, and was 
rejoiced to see the imperial armies occupied in the east. Without 
going so far as to conclude a formal alliance with the Turks, the 
French envoy at Constantinople was active in urging on the war, 
and French go!d was employed to support the armies of the 
infidel. 

In 1684 the duke of Lorraine, deprived of the assistance of the 
Poles, undertook the sole command of the imperial and German 
troops. He laid siege to Ofen, the former capital of Hungary, which 
for 145 years had been held by the Turks, and was reckoned among 
the ten great cities of their empire. He succeeded in defeating an 
army which was sent to its relief, but the heroic obstinacy of the 
garrison foiled all attempts to take the city, and compelled the 
raising of the siege after it had lasted 109 days. In 1685 this 
failure was redeemed, Charles of Lorraine won another great victory, 
stormed the fortress of Neuhausel, and drove the Hungarian rebels 
‘under Tékéli back to Transylvania. In the next year the siege of 
Ofen was resumed by the duke of Lorraine and the elector of 
Bavaria. This time the imperialists were determined to succeed, 
and in September the town was taken by storm. 


. 7 


A.D. 1683-1688. REDUCTION OF HUNGARY. 211 


These imperalist successes were fatal to the rebellion in Hungary 
which had given rise to the war. T6k6li had experienced the in- 
gratitude of his allies. The Turks, treating him as the cause of 
their misfortunes, had sent him in chains to Adrianople. Before 
long, however, the want of his services was felt, he was released 
and sent back to Transylvania. But his influence had suffered 
fatally. Hungary lay at the feet of the victorious emperor, and 
Leopold was not long in making his power felt. A special court of 
justice was erected to act against the rebels, and the severity of 
its proceedings recalls the acts of Alva’s council of blood. .The 
Hungarian estates were summoned to Pressburg, and intimidated 
into sanctioning important changes in the constitution. The 
crown ceased to be elective, and was made hereditary in the 
House of Hapsburg. ‘The nobles had to renounce their right 
of armed resistance. The coronation-oath, on which the liberties 
of Hungary were based, was abolished. At the same time, 
though no formal change was made in the relations of religious 
parties, the Jesuits were able to continue their persecutions in spite 
of the law. It was computed that more than half of the Hungarian 
Protestants suffered death or exile in these years. 

Meanwhile the Austrian successes continued. In 1687 the new 
Grand Vizier, Suleiman Pacha, advanced with a large force to 
attempt the recovery of Ofen. But he was confronted by the 
German troops at Mohacz, the scene of a great Turkish victory in 
1526, when the last non-Hapsburg king of Hungary fell in battle. 
After the lapse of a century anda half the Christian defeat was 
avenged. ‘The duke of J.orraine and Lewis of Baden won a complete 
victory, which was followed by the reduction of Slavonia and 
Croatia. These unwonted defeats, coupled with losses in Greece, 
aroused a mutiny among the Turkish troops. The Janissaries took 
the lead in demanding the punishment of their generals. ‘The Sultan 
attempted to pacify them by sending them the head of the grand 
vizier. But concessions only encouraged further demands, and 
the spirit of revolt spread from the army to the capital. In Nov. 
1687, Mobammed IV. was deposed and replaced by his brother 
Solyman II. The new Sultan, who had lived for fifty-two years 
in compulsory retirement, showed unexpected capacity and energy. 
But he ascended the throne under unfavourable circumstances, 
‘which made it difficult to arrest the progress of decline. He was 
occupied for some months in suppressing the disorder and anarchy 
which accompanied the change of rulers. 

These events in Constantinople gave new advantages to the 
imperialists. Karly in 1688 they advanced against Transylvania, 
where the vassal princes of the Porte had so long been-a thorn in 


212 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP, xt. 


the side of the Austrian monarchy. The ruling prince, Apasi, was 
occupied in gluttony and self-indulgence, and was easily induced to 
desert the sinking cause of the Turks and to ally himself with 
Austria. A treaty was arranged at Hermanstadt in May, 1688, 
in which the Turkish suzerainty was formally renounced, and 
Transylvania became a vassal province of the king of Hungary. 
Imperial garrisons were to be admitted into the chief fortresses. 
The emperor, on his side, promised protection and the security of 
political and religious freedom. 

Later in the year the war against the Turks was resumed, 
and in September, Belgrad, the great Danube fortress, and the 
bulwark of the Turkish power in Hungary, was taken by storm. 
The imperialists now became the aggressors. In 1689 Lewis of Baden 
crossed the Danube and invaded Servia. ‘Twice he defeated the 
Turkish armies, and closed the campaign by the capture of Nizza 
and Widdin. It was in vain that Solyman made overtures of peace. 
The emperor’s demands were too excessive to be accepted without 
disgrace. ‘lo make matters worse, a new enemy, the Ozar of 
Russia, took the field against the Turks. They had been driven 
from Hungary, and the old idea of expelling them altogether from 
the soil of Europe was revived with great prospects of success. 

§ 32. At this critical moment two events combined to save the 
Ottoman empire from dissolution, and to reverse for a moment the 
fortunes of war. In the first place, war broke out with Louis XIV., 
which compelled the emperor to divert his attention from eastern 
affairs and to send his best troops and generals to the Rhine. 
Secondly, the Sultan conferred the office of Grand Vizier upon 
Mustafa Kiuprili, the brother of Achmet, whose death in 1676 
had been so fatal to the Porte. This third member of the Kiuprili 
family emulated and even surpassed the reforming energy of his 
predecessors. ‘Though he held office only for two years, yet in that 
period he made his influence felt in every part of the administration. 
‘The finances were reformed, the Christian subjects were conciliated 
by a policy of religious toleration, and a new army was created 
with improved discipline and a revived thirst for military glory. 
The change which could be produced by the ability and energy of 
a single man is conspicuous in the events of 1690. 

In April, Apasi, prince of Transylvania, died, and the imperial 
party strained every nerve to secure the election of the emperor 
himself as his successor. But the grand vizier took the bold step of 
nominating the Hungarian rebel T6k6li as prince of Transylvania, 
and sent forces which enabled him for a time to maintain his 
position in the province. While Lewis of Baden was engaged in 
war with 'Ték6li, the grand vizier himself led a Turkish army into 


A.D. 1688-1695. AUSTRO-TURKISH WAR, 213 


Servia. Nizza and Widdin were recovered, and the Turks advanced 
to the siege of Belgrad. The garrison made a gallant defence in 
spite of the smallness of theirnumbers. But an accidental explosion, 
which blew up great part of the wall, enabled the besiegers to 
recover the greatest of the imperial conquests. The government 
at Vienna was thrown into consternation by the sudden change 
of circumstances. arly in 1691, Mustafa Kiuprili strengthened 
his army with reinforcements and prepared for a new invasion of 
Hungary. ‘The death of the Sultan in June brought no advantage 
to the enemies of the Porte. His successor, Achmet II., confirmed 
the appointment of Mustafa, who was now advancing against Peter- 
wardein. The margrave of Baden hastened from Transylvania to 
block his way. The two armies met at Szalankemen, where the 
imperial general won the greatest of his victories. The grand 
vizier was killed by a bullet, and with him perished the last hope 
of the restoration of the Turkish empire to its old greatness. The 
victors followed up their success by capturing Grosswardein and 
by the complete conquest of Transylvania. 'T6k6li had been driven 
into Moravia, the young Apasi was a nonentity, and in December 
1691, the estates accepted a treaty, by which the Hapsburgs were 
to hold the princely title, on condition of recognising all ancient 
rights and privileges. ‘The emperor was to receive a yearly tribute 
of 50,000 ducats. This treaty destroyed all the ambitious dreams 
of Tékbli. Still he remained true to his allies and fought during 
the rest of the war on the ‘Turkish side. 

The Turkish power was not destroyed by the battle of Szalankemen. 
Lewis of Baden was despatched to the Rhine to take the place of 
Charles of Lorraine who had died in 1690. Eugene of Savoy was 
employed in Italy. In their absence the command of the imperial 
troops in Hungary fell into comparatively inferior hands and the 
Turks were enabled to retain Belgrad, though they failed to regain 
any more of their lost ground. In 1695 Achmet II. died, and was 
succeeded by his nephew Mustafa II., the son of Mohammed IV. 
He declared his intention of following the example of his ancestors, 
and commanding the Turkish armies in person. For the moment 
he succeeded in inspiring new life into the effete monarchy. At 
sea the Ottoman fleet gained several advantages over the Venetians. 
In September, 1695, the Sultan crossed the Danube with an 
army, captured a number of fortresses, and completely destroyed a 
detachment of the imperial army. Inthe next year he again entered 
Hungary, and at Olasch near ‘'emesvar came into collision with the 
imperialists under Caprara and the elector of Saxony. <A long and 
obstinate battle ensued, in which both sides suffered heavily and 
neither could claim a decided advantage. Directly afterwards the 


214 MODERN EUROPE. - Omar, xr. 


elector departed to canvass for the throne of Poland, which was 


vacant by the death of Sobieski. The command of the imperialists 
was now undertaken by Eugene of Savoy, who was set at liberty by 
the recently arranged neutrality of Italy. Under his able leadership 
the supremacy of the Christian arms was completely restored. In 
1697 the Sultan once more advanced from Belgrad to the Theiss 
At Zenta on that river was fought one of the great battles of the 
century, in which Eugene won a decisive victory. The Turkish 
army, numbering over 100,000 men, was almost annihilated. Want 
of provisions and floods prevented the prince from reaping the full 
fruits of his victory, and allowed the Turks still to retain Temesvar 
and Belgrad. : 

The western war had been terminated by the peace of Ryswick, 
and the emperor was now able to concentrate his forces in the east. 
The Turkish power was once more in imminent danger. The 
Russians, under Peter the Great, conducted a victorious campaign 
which ended in the capture of Azof. Venice had reduced the 
Morea, and was beginning to advance beyond the isthmus of Corinth. 
But several circumstances combined to make the emperor desirous 
to end the war. Charles II. of Spain was childless and evidently 
dying. The great question of the Spanish succession required 
settlement, and it was necessary for the emperor to have his 
hands free. England and Holland used their influence to bring 
about an agreement. In October, 1698, a truce was concluded, 
which ripened into the important treaty of Carlowitz (January, 
1699). By this treaty Austria obtained the whole of Transylvania, 
Hungary with the exception of the Banat of Temesvar, and the 
sreater part of Slavonia and Croatia. Venice retained the Morea, 
but restored all conquests north of the isthmus of Corinth. To 
Poland the sultan restored the territories in Podolia which had 
been conquered under Mohammed IV. Russia kept Azof, and thus 
secured a position on the Black Sea. The Ottoman power was 
seriously diminished by the treaty. The decline which began 
with the victory of Sobieski at Vienna was completed. From this 
time it ceased to be a danger to the Christian powers of Europe. » 

It only remains now to notice the end of the Hungarian leader 
Tokéli. The emperor had demanded his surrender at Carlowitz, 
but the Sultan honourably refused compliance. The luckless rebel 
received from the gratitude of the Porte some property in Asia 
Minor near Nicomedia. ‘There he was joined by his wife, who had 
been a prisoner in the hands of the imperialists, but was released 
after the peace. In 1703 'Tokéli died, his wife having died the 
year before. 


= 


CHAPTER XIII. 
THE AGE OF LOUIS XIV. 


I, Louis’ EARLY YEARS.—§ 1. Louis becomes his own first minister ; fall 
of Fouquet; Colbert receives office. § 2. Colbert’s administrative 
reforms. § 3. Louis’ ambition. § 4. War of Devolution; conquests 
in Flanders and Franche-Comté; the Triple Alliance ; treaty of Aix- 
la-Chapelle. II. FRANCE AT THE ZENITH OF ITS POWER.—S 5. In- 
creased influence of religious motives over Louis XIV.; treaty of 
Dover; ascendancy of Louvois; war with Holland; fall of the De 
Witts and accession of William of Orange. § 6. Holland finds allies; 
French successes in 1673; league formed at the Hague. § 7. France 
against the rest of Europe; conquest of Franche-Comté; victories. of 
Turenne in 1674. § 8. Campaign of 1675 ; death of Turenne; retire- 
ment of Condé and Montecuculi. § 9. Campaign of 16763 financial 
difficulties of France ; campaign of 1677; marriage of William of Orange 
with Mary of England. § 10. Treaty of Nimwegen  § 11. Greatness of 
France at this time ; beginning of decline; the king’s mistresses ; Madame 
de Maintenon. III. THe REUNIONS AND THE LEAGUE OF AUGSBURG. 
—§ 12. The chambres de réunion; Louis’ aggressions are unopposed. 
§ 13. Rise of the Jansenists ; religious persecution. § 14. Quarrel of 
Louis XIV. and Innocent XI. § 15. Persecution of the Huguenots ; 
the dragonnades of Louvois ; revocation of the Edict of Nantes. § 16. 
Alienation of the European powers from France; formation of the 
League of Augsburg ; William of Orange is offered the English crown. 
§ 17. Louis’ inéervention in the election to the archbishopric of 
Cologne; French attack upon Germany; accession of William III. 
§ 18. Outbreak of a general war; enormous exertions of France ; 
campaign of 1690; the battle of the Boyne. § 19. Campaign of 
1691; death of Louvois; naval battle of La Hogue; general survey of 
the war. § 20. Exhaustion of France; Louis detaches Savoy from the 
League; treaty of Ryswick; Louis XIV.’s position. IV. WAR OF 
THE SPANISH SUCCESSION.—§ 21. The succession question in Spain; 
European interest in it; the two partition treaties. § 22. Charles 
II.’s will; Louis accepts the crown for his grandson. § 23. Circum- 
stances favourable to Louis; his own conduct excites opposition ; 
formation of the Grand Ailiance; weakness of France. § 24. The 
war begins in Italy; Italian campaigns of 1701-2; Savoy changes 
sides. § 25. Campaigns of 1702-5 in the Netherlands and in Germany. 
§ 26. Campaign of 1704; battle of Blenheim. § 27, Campaigns of 
1705-6 in the Netherlands, Italy, and Spain. § 28. The allies checked’ 
in 1707; Charles XII. at Altranstadt. § 29. Growing exhaustion of. 

_ France; campaign of 1708 in the Netherlands; Louis XIV. opens. 


216 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP, xi. 


negotiations; battle of Malplaquet, 1709. § 30. Congress of Gertruy- 
denburg ; reaction in favour of France; defeat of the allies in Spain; 
fall of the Whig ministry in England; death of the Emperor Joseph I. 
§ 31. Negotiations for peace; campaign of 1612; treaty of Utrecht. 
§ 32. Charles VI. has to give way; treaties of Rastadt and Baden. 
V. Last YEARS OF Louis XIV.—§ 33, Bigotry of the king in his old 
age; destruction of Port Royal; the bull Unigenitus. § 34. Deaths 
in the royal family ; Monsieur; the Dauphin; the Duke and Duchess 
of Burgundy; the Duke of Berry. § 35. Louis XIV.’s will; his 
death; general character of his reign, 


J. Louis’ Earty YEears.—Co.Bert’s ADMINISTRATION. 


§ 1. ON the death of Mazarin, Louis XIV. at once undertook in person 
the government of the state. The place hitherto occupied by 
Richelieu and Mazarin was henceforth filled by the king himself. 
The courtiers were astonished at this sudden resolution of the 
young and pleasure-loving prince, they were still more astonished 
that he really carried it out. He had to work several hours a 
day, but he had a real love of details, and soon grew accustomed 
to and interested in his new occupations. He continued to employ 
the same ministers who had acted under Mazarin. ‘The chancellor 
was Séguier, a devoted adherent of the monarchy. lLyonne, a 
diplomatist scarcely inferior to Mazarin himself, had charge of 
foreign affairs. The military administration was in the hands of 
Le Tellier, famous chiefly as the father of Louvois, who was already 
assisting his father and was destined to succeed him. All these 
ministers were contented to stand in the same relations to Louis as 
they had previously to Mazarin. But the most ambitious if not 
the most able of the ministers, was Fouquet, the superintendent of 
finance. He had amassed a large fortune, which he spent partly on 
a magnificent establishment, partly on the patronage of literature 
and art. He aspired to the vacant position gf chief minister. 
Louis, who had been warned against Fouquet by Mazarin, was 
determined to get rid of him. He had a successor already prepared 
in the person of Colbert, a humble and industrious servant of 
Mazarin, whom the latter on his death-bed had recommended to 
the king. The secrecy and almost treachery of the measures which 
Louis took for the arrest of Fouquet, show that he was as yet 
hardly conscious of the extent of the royal power. After every- 
thing had been done to inspire confidence, the minister was suddenly 
imprisoned, and a commission appointed to try him. The trial 
lasted three years, and in spite of the bitter hostility of the court 
he was condemned only to exile. The king, assuming the converse 
of his right of pardon, altered the sentence to perpetual imprison- 
ment in Pinerolo. ‘There Fouquet died in 1680, though many 
suspected that his reported death was a fiction, and that he 


A.pv. 1659. ADMINISTRATION OF COLBERT. 217 


was in reality that most famous of state prisoners, the Man in the 
Tron Mask. Louis now abolished the office of superintendent and 
entrusted the finances to a commission of five with Colbert at 
their head. The inner council of the king was now composed of 
Lyonne, Le Tellier and Colbert. With their assistance Louis set 
himself to the task of internal reform, so necessary after the recent 
disturbances and maladministration. 

§ 2. The chief burden of these reforms fell upon Colbert, who worked 
with inflinching assiduity. The first and most essential reform was 
that of the finances, which had fallen into the same condition as 
they were before the administration of Sully. The “ partisans” 
were again in full activity : of the taxes levied less than half found 
their way to the treasury; the annual expenditure exceeded the 
revenue by 22 millions. The measures taken to remedy these 
abuses were in the highest degree arbitrary but effective. Interest 
on loans was reduced to five per cent. by a reckless breach of public 
faith. Individuals were suddenly reduced to poverty, but their 
interests were disregarded in comparison with the common welfare. 
A large number of useless offices were swept away, and the 
system of farming the taxes was abolished. Richelieu’s Intendants 
were revived to superintend the financial administration in the 
provinces. The taille, the most obnoxious of taxes because it fell 
only on the middle and lower classes, was reduced, and the treasury 
compensated by duties on articles of consumption which fell upon 
all classes. The result of these and other changes was that the 
revenue was immensely increased, while the pressure of taxation 
was no heavier than before. This happy result was attained by the 
measures which Colbert took to increase the national wealth. 
Native manufactures were encouraged in every possible way. 
Foreign manufacturers were bribed to take up their abode in France. 
Heavy duties were levied on imported goods, while bounties were 
lavishly granted to domestic producers. Colbert’s whole system 
was one of protection, and was attended with evil as well as 
advantage. The interests of the consumer were sacrificed to those 
of the producer, and the latter was taught to rely rather on state 
aid than on his own exertions. Commerce was patronised as well 
as manufactures. A great canal was projected which was to join 
the Mediterranean with the German Ocean, and thus to carry the 
commerce between north and south through the heart of France. 
Marseilles and Dunkirk were made free ports. Four great com- 
panies were formed to trade with the Hast and West Indies, with 
Africa and the north. Great part of the capital was furnished by 
the government, and the royal influence was exerted to obtain 
subscriptions san individual capitalists. The French navy, which 

ithe 


218 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. xt. 


had disappeared under Mazarin, was revived under Colbert.. The 
great ports of Toulon and Brest were strengthened, and the naval 
power of France was before long inferior only to that of England 
and Holland. The only element of national industry which the 
government entirely neglected was agriculture, but even that felt 
the impulse of the new activity in other departments. Although 
Colbert’s measures were not in accordance with the principles of 
modern political economy, they were not ill-suited to existing 
circumstances, and they mark an era in the history of France. 

All departments felt the same reforming influence. The judicial 
administration was centralised, and obsolete differences of custom 
and procedure modified or abolished. Codes of civil, criminal, and 
commercial law were drawn up and issued in rapid succession. A 
regular police system was instituted, and became a new and powerful 
weapon for the extension of the royal power. The army was 
reorganised by Le Tellier and Louvois. Discipline was rigorously 
enforced, uniforms were introduced to distinguish the soldier from 
the civilian, magazines and hospitals were organised. One of the 
chief promoters of the new system was an officer called Martinet, 
whose name has become a proverbial expression for rigorous 
severity. The bayonet was brought into general use, artillery and 
fortifications were improved. The king found a new means of 
occupying the still restless nobility by the gift of military 
commissions which they could hardly refuse.. The patronage of 
literature and art was undertaken by the government as part of its 
duties, and in the same spirit as the others. A regular list of 
pensioners was kept, and among the recipients of the royal bounty 
were included distinguished men from most European countries. 
The Academy of Sciences was founded in 1664 on the model of 
the English Royal Society. In 1669 the Academy of Music was 
formed for the encouragement of the opera, which had been 
introduced by Mazarin. Inevery department of life the influence 
of the central government was felt. The result was a forced and 
hasty development, which could not be lasting because it had no 
firm root in individual energy and independence. 

§ 3. Whatever were the defects of the royal policy, these early 
years of Louis XIV. are among the most prosperous in the history 
of France. The country was at peace both within and without. 
But with his other magnificent tastes Louis XIV. unfortunately 
combined a love of military glory and of national agerandisemeni. 
Determined to maintain his own supremacy in Fiance, he was 
equally determined to assert and maintain French supremacy in 
Kurope. This is visible in all his acts even during the period of 
peace. The French and Spanish ambassadors in London disputed 


A.D. 1660-1667. FOREIGN RELATIONS OF LOUIS XIV. 219 


for precedence. With the help of armed retainers and English 
sympathy the Spaniard gained a victory over his rival. Louis was 
willing to treat this asa casus belli, but the feeble government. of 
Spain hastened to apologise and to withdraw its pretensions. Ina 
similar spirit, Louis refused to acknowledge the naval supremacy 
of England by lowering his flag. Charles II, anxious to be 
independent of his subjects and to have plenty of money, not only 
compromised the obnoxious demand, but consented to sell Dunkirk, 
Cromwell's great conquest, for four million francs. And it was not 
only temporal powers that Louis treated with such haughtiness, 
even the pope had to bow before the superior power of France. 
The French ambassador at Rome, Créqui, had been insulted, and 
his followers maltreated by the papal guards. Créqui accused the 
pope’s own family. Louis at once demanded satisfaction, and 
enforced his demand by seizing Avignon, and supporting the dukes 
of Modena and Parma in their war against the pope. Alexander 
VII. was forced to make a most humble submission, to banish his 
brother from Rome, and to send his nephew, Cardinal Chigi, on a 
special mission to France. He was, says Voltaire, the first papal 
legate ever sent to demand pardon. 

On all sides Louis was successful. In Holland, the burgher party 
was in power under John de Witt, and always leaned to the French 
alliance, which was renewed in 1662. In Germany, the league of the 
Rhine gave the French king more real power than the emperor. 
The unfortunate duke of Lorraine signed a treaty promising the 
succession to Louis on his death, but though he afterwards retracted 
this, he was compelled to cede his last fortress, Marsal. It was 
quite in accordance with Louis’s magnificent ideas that he broke off 
the old alliance of France with the Turks, and posed for a moment 
as the champion of Christendom. Neither emperor nor pope desired 
the help of so powerful an ally, nevertheless, 6000 French troops were 
despatched to Hungary and contributed to the victory of St Gothard 
on the Raab (1664). When war broke out in 1664 between England 
and Holland, Louis at first remained neutral, in the hope that the 
two great naval rivals would weaken or destroy each other. But 
as England had at first the upper hand, he espoused the Dutch 
cause, contributed to their successes in 1666 and 1667, and foreed 
Charles II. to accede to the peace of Breda. 

Special importance attaches to Louis XIV.’s relations with Spain, 
because with them are connected the great political objects of his 
reign. Mazarin had concluded the Spanish marriage with the definite 
intention of securing to the French king the succession to the 
crown of Spain. Louis XIV. inherited this intention from. his 
minister; but he was willing, if he could not get the whole succession, 


220 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. xIII, 


to content himself with the Spanish Netherlands and Franche-Comté. 
The extension of the frontier towards the north-east was desirable 
for military reasons, as giving increased security to Paris. It was 
possible to bring great pressure to bear upon Spain by means of 
Portugal, which had gained and kept its independence mainly through 
French assistance. Louis offered to withdraw this assistance, which 
was continued secretly after the treaty of the Pyrenees, and to 
combine with Spain to crush Portugai, on condition either that the 
Infanta’s renunciation of her claims to the throne should be declared 
invalid, or that Franche-Comté and great part of the Netherlands 
should be handed over to France. The offer was refused by Philip TV., 
and therefore Louis continued to support the Portuguese. In 1665, 
4000 French troops under Marshal Schomberg gained the battle of 
Villa-Viciosa, which secured the House of Braganza on their throne. 

§ 4. On the 17th of September, 1665, Philip IV. of Spain died. By 
his first wife, the daughter of Henry IV., he had one child, Maria 
Theresa, married to Louis XIV. By his second marriage with Maria 
Anna of Austria, Philip left two children, Charles II. who succeeded 
him, and Margaret Theresa who married the emperor Leopold I. The 
young king, Charles II., was from the first weakly and ailing: his 
death was always expected, but he managed to survive the century, 
Louis XIV. brought forward an immediate claim to several provinces 
of the Netherlands, based on the “ law of devolution.” This was an 
old feudal custom by which the children ofa first marriage succeeded 
to'the exclusion of all later descendants. At first Louis hoped to 
get his claim recognised without resort to arms. But sixteen 
months of diplomatic activity failed to induce the Spanish regent to 
dismember the empire. In 1667 the war commenced with an 
invasion of Flanders. Louis in person accompanied Turenne, and 
his presence gave to the campaign an appearance of luxury and 
pomp to which Europe was unaccustomed. No battles were 
fought, nothing was undertaken but sieges, in which the king 
delighted. ‘The Spaniards were unprepared for resistance, and one 
fortress after another fell into the hands of the French. The 
campaign of 1668 was still more speedy and successful. An 
army under Condé was collected in Burgundy and suddenly entered 
Franche-Comté. Within a fortnight the whole province was 
reduced, and Louis hurried thither to receive its formal submission. 
But these great successes had aroused the jealousy and alarm of the 
other European powers. Spain made peace with Portugal, and 
England, Holland and Sweden concluded the famous Triple Alliance. 
The powers which had hitherto combined together to resist Spain, 
now found it necessary to support their old enemy against France. 
Louis XIV. yielded with surprising readiness, and accepted the 


A.D. 1665-1668. PEACE OF AIX-LA-CHAPELLE. 221 


treaty of Aix-la-Chapelle (May, 1668), by which he restored 
Franche-Comté, but retained his conquests in the Netherlands. 
Thus France secured an important accession of strength on the 
weakest point of her frontier. It is usual for English historians to 
attribute Louis’ moderation to the dread of the Triple Alliance. 
His motive is perhaps rather to be found in a secret treaty which 
he had made with the emperor Leopold. By this, Spain itself was 
to go to the Austrian Hapsburgs, but France was to have the out- 
lying Spanish provinces. Charles II.’s death appeared so likely 
that Louis preferred to wait for peaceful acquisitions rather than to 
draw on himself the hostility of Europe by further conquests. 


Il. FRANCE AT THE ZENITH OF ITS PowER.—ASCENDANCY 
or Lovuvols. 


§ 5. From the treaty of Aix-la-Chapelle must be dated an important 
change in the attitude of Louis XIV. Hitherto he had followed 
the lines laid down by Richelieu and Mazarin, who had paid little 
attention to religious differences, and, had aimed solely at the 
political advancement of France. Henceforth he became more 
and more reactionary and bigoted, and resumed that policy of 
enforcing religious unity which had given rise to such evils in the 
last century. He was anxious to crush the Huguenots at home at 
first rather by peaceful pressure than by force. But a natural and 
obvious preliminary was to weaken the Calvinists abroad, in whom 
the Huguenots found their chief allies. The most important of 
these were the Dutch. Holland offered an asylum to refugees of ali 
countries. It was there that the French exiles printed books and 
pamphlets which attacked the established government and religion 
of France. Louis had also political reasons for his hostility. He 
was indignant that the Dutch, a nation of merchants, should 
presume to interfere with the affairs of princes, and especially with 
his designs on the Spanish succession. The Triple Alliance, though 
less important than has been thought, was yet a menace to France, 
and Louis regarded John de Witt as its chief author. The existing 
government of Holland was based on the exclusion of the House of 
Orange, which had been accomplished on the death of William II. 
in 1650. Louis thought to render a service to the cause of monarchy 
by overthrowing the republic and restoring authority to William III. 
of Orange, who was just arriving at manly age. 

It was not difficult to detach England from the Triple Alliance. 
The bombardment of Chatham still rankled in people’s minds, and 
commercial jealousy was a fertile source of quarrel. Charles II. 
hated his pecuniary dependence upon Parliament, and his enforced 


222 | MODERN EUROPE. - Caar, xu. 


adhesion to the English church. Negotiations were undertaken by 
Charles’ sister, Henrietta of Orleans, the favourite of the French 
king and court. She concluded the treaty of Dover (1670), by 
which Charles II. undertook to restore Catholicism in England, to 
combine with France against Holland, and to offer no obstacle to 
Louis’ désigns on Spain. In return for these concessions, he was 
to receive a large sum of money and the assistance of French 
troops to crush a possible revolt of his subjects. This disgraceful 
treaty was kept a secret even from the majority of the ministers. 
They were duped by a false treaty which was only concerned with 
the alliance against Holland, and this was not made public for more 
than a year. Directly after her return from Dover, the duchess of 
Orleans died suddenly, not without suspicion of having been 
poisoned by her husband. 

With Sweden, the other member of the alliance, French 
diplomacy was equally successful. The old alliance with France 
was renewed, and the Swedes engaged to invade Germany in case 
that power undertook the defence of Holland. The emperor 
Leopold was bound by the League of the Rhine and by his secret 
treaty with Louis. Most of the German princes agreed to remain 
neutral, and the archbishop of Cologne and the bishop of Miinster 
openly took up arms against Holland. Frederick William. of 
Brandenburg, the Great Elector, alone remained obstinate in his 
adherence to the Protestant cause. He hoped to obtain from the 
Dutch the territory in Cleve which they still held. Thus the 
success of France seemed assured. Spain was the only power that 
was likely to assist the Dutch, and the helplessness of Spain had 
been manifested in the recent wars. Charles II. of Lorraine, who 
hoped to take advantage of a new war to regain his lost in- 
dependence, had been expelled from his duchy in 1670 and driven 
into exile from which he never returned. In 1671, Lyonne, the 


foreign minister, died, and his death was fatal to the continuance of, 


peace. Colbert had no longer a supporter in the royal council, 
where the ascendancy fell to Louvois, brutal and harsh in domestic 
affairs, and the ardent supporter of an aggressive foreign policy. 
He becomes tue evil genius of Louis XIV. 

In 1672 the unjust and unprovoked war commenced. On sea 
the Dutch contended on equal terms with the combined fleets of 
England and France, and fought a desperate but indecisive battle in 
Southwold bay. But on land matters were altogether different. 
The army had been persistently sacrificed to the navy by De Witt, 
on account of its military loyalty to the House of Orange. There 
was no force capable of resisting the French attack. Louis had 
collected two great armies under Turenne and Condé, while a third 


A.D... 1670-1672. INVASION OF HOLLAND. 223 


force under the duke of Luxemburg was to co-operate with the 
bishops of Munster and Cologne. To avoid arousing the open 
hostility of Spain, it was determined not to march through the 
Netherlands, but to take a circuitous route. A detachment was 
sent to make a feigned attack on Maestricht, where the Dutch 
were best prepared, while the main force advanced to Neuss and 
Kaiserwerth, which the elector of Cologne had ceded as military 
depots. The passage of the Rhine, which gave such undeserved 
fame to Louis’ armies, was easily effected. he Dutch could make 
no resistance to attack from an unexpected quarter. One fortress 
after another fell into the hands of the king, who delighted in 
successful sieges. De Witt, conscious of defeat, attempted to 
negotiate, but the French terms were too humiliating to be 
accepted. Meanwhile party feeling in Holland had been stimulated 
rather than allayed by the national disasters. The partisans of the 
House of Orange rose against the unfortunate rather than guilty 
government, and compelled the appointment of William of Orange 
as stadtholder.. Not content with this, the mob at the Hague rose 
in armed revolt and brutally murdered John de Witt and _ his 
brother Cornelius. William was accused of complicity with the 
crime, probably on no other ground than that it was to his advan- 
tage. Although the nephew of Charles II., he was determined to 
defend to the last the national independence, and he infused his 
own dauntless spirit into the people whom he ruled. The dykes 
were cut, and floods offered a more effectual barrier than troops to 
the invaders’ progress. Already the first tide of French success had 
spent itself. Louis, under the influence of the self-confident 
Louvois, had rejected the advice of his abler generals. Instead of 
making a rapid and decisive advance, he set himself to capture 
unimportant towns, and weakened his army by detaching garrisons 
' from it. When he found his career of conquest checked, he quitted 
the army, and returned with the court to St. Germain. 

§ 6. The rapidity of the early successes had aroused all the enemies 
of France; the first check encouraged them to declare themselves. 
The emperor Leopold, disregarding all conventions with Louis, 
concluded an alliance with the elector of Brandenburg for the 
defence of Holland. A combined army, under Frederick William 
and the imperial general Montecuculi, advanced to the support of 
William of Orange. Spain, conscious of its own weakness, was 
unwilling to declare openly against France, but Monterey, the 
governor of the Netherlands, sent secret assistance to the Dutch. 
‘these events necessitated a complete change in the military plans 
of the French. Instead of continuing their conquests, they had to 
‘stand on the defensive. While Luxemburg remained in Holland to 


224. MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. xu. 


make head against William, Condé undertook the defence of 
Alsace, and Turenne advanced to the Rhine to check the German 
troops. Never were Turenne’s abilities more conspicuously mani- 
fested than in this campaign. ‘Though he had only 15,000 men, he 
handled them with marvellous dexterity. The elector and Monte- 
cuculi marched up the Rhine to find a safe crossing. Everywhere 
they found the French in front of them, while they were unable to 
force an engagement with their superior numbers. At length, 
wearied and exhausted, they gave up all hope of entering Holland, 
and retreated to attack the French allies in Cologne and Miinster. 
Louis and Louvois, overjoyed at the withdrawal of this formidable 
enemy froin the Rhine, sent strict orders to Turenne not to risk a 
pursuit. But conscious of his strength, he boldly disregarded the 
orders and advanced to attack the allies.. The worn out German 
army could make no effective resistance, and were driven from one 
defensive line to another, till the whole of Westphalia was. in 
French hands. ‘The elector of Brandenburg retired in disgust to 
Berlin and offered terms which were readily accepted. He promised 
to remain neutral, and the French undertook to restore the Cleve 
territories which were held by the Dutch. Meanwhile, in Holland, 
William of Orange was bitterly disappointed at the failure of his 
German allies. Nevertheless, with a reinforcement of 10,000 
Spaniards, he attacked Charleroi, though without success. During 
his absence, Luxemburg made a bold march over the ice against 
the Hague, and the capital was only saved by a sudden thaw. The 
brutal spirit of Louvois had infected the French army, and during 
their retreat they were guilty of atrocities which left an abiding 
hatred of France in the minds of the Dutch. Louis XIV. now 
reappeared in person at the head of an army. The brilliant but 
rash operations of 1672 were now out of the question, and it was 
determined to reduce Maestricht and to make it a military basis. 
The siege was successfully conducted by Vauban, the greatest 
engineer of the age, and the fortress, which commanded the whole 
line of the Maas, was forced to surrender (June 29, 1673). 

Thus in the summer of 1673 France had more than held its own 
against numerous enemies. But it was evident that the war had 
‘completely lost its original character. In August a league was 
concluded at the Hague between the emperor, Spain, and Holland. 
It was joined by the king of Denmark, the elector of Saxony, and 
the duke of Lorraine. The imperial army had been reformed in 
Bohemia after its recent defeat. Montecuculi was not again out- 
manceuvred by Turenne. A junction was effected with William of 
Orange, and the combined armies laid siege to Bonn. All the 
French efforts to relieve the town proved fruitless. The Rhine 


A.D. 1673-1674. FIRST COALITION AGAINST FRANCE. 225 


was completely lost to France, and Turenne had to fall back on the 
Sarre. This decided the attitude of Germany. The bishops of 
Munster and Cologne had to make peace. The elector of Branden- 
burg showed signs of breaking his neutrality. The connexion of 
France with the German princes, established so firmly by the 
treaties of Westphalia, the Rhine, and the Pyrenees, was in a 
moment annihilated. Soon afterwards the English parliament, 
bitterly exasperated by the religious policy of Charles IL., forced 
him to make peace with the Dutch (February, 1674). Sweden 
was the only ally left to France, and Sweden, isolated in the north, 
could do nothing of importance. Thus Louis XIV.’s aggressions had 
completely altered the whole balance of European politics. The 
invasion of Holland had served only to revive the old duel between 
France and the House of Hapsburg, with this all-important differ- 
ence, that the powers which had previously supported the former 
were now united in opposition to her. 

§ 7. Fortunately for France, Louis XIV. showed himself fully 
conscious of the changed aspect of affairs, and altered his plans to 
meet it. He ordered the evacuation of all the recent conquests in 
Holland except Maestricht and Grave. He was even anxious to 
make peace with the enemy whom he had so wantonly provoked, 
but William of Orange would listen to no terms. The war was 
brought back to the French frontiers. Condé was to make head 
against the Dutch and Spaniards on the Meuse. ‘'Turenne under- 
took the defence of Alsace and Lorraine against the Germans. 
Schomberg was sent to protect Roussillon from a threatened Spanish 
invasion. But while taking these measures to defend his newly 
acquired borders, Louis did not altogether abandon his schemes of 
conquest.. He himself’ led an army into Franche-Comté. The 
duke of Lorraine attempted to defend the province but was pre- 
vented by Turenne. ‘The second conquest of Franche-Comté took 
six weeks to accomplish, but was complete and final. Henceforth 
the Jura was to be the eastern frontier of France. While the king 
was occupied with this easy conquest, Condé was attacked by the 
prince of Orange. The French position was too strong for an 
assault, and the Dutch and Spanish troops retreated. Condé 
followed them and forced an engagement at Senef. A fiercely 
contested battle ended in the victory of neither, but the exhaustion 
of both armies. William succeeded in taking Grave, but this was 
the only success gained by the allies in 1674. Meanwhile, Turenne 
was conducting a campaign which put the seal on his military 
fame. Instead of waiting to be attacked, he took the aggres- 
sive, crossed the Rhine at Philipsburg, and crushed the imperial 
forces at Sinzheim. He followed up his success by devastating the 


226 MODERN EUROPE. » Cuap, xumr, 


Palatinate, so as to deprive the enemy of sustenance. The cruelty 
with which this was done is a lasting stain on Turenne’s reputation. 
The Germans now received reinforcements, and resumed their 
advance with numbers far superior to the troops of Turenne. ‘The 
French government, fearing an invasion, ordered Turenne to fall 
back for the defence of France. But he again refused to obey the 
orders of the court. For a fortnight he held the enemy in check, 
until want of provisions compelled them to march along the Rhine 
to Strasburg. Turenne followed them, but too late to save the city, 
which surrendered, and opened to the imperialists the entrance into 
Alsace. Instead of retreating, as everybody expected, the French 
general again attacked the enemy, and won a complete victory at 
Enzheim, a battle in which Churchill, afterwards duke of Marl- 
borough, took. part. But immediately afterwards the arrival of the 
elector of Brandenburg with more than 20,000 men, restored 
their superiority to the German forces, and Turenne fell slowly back 
to Lorraine. The Germans occupied Upper Alsace, and promised 
themselves complete success in the ensuing campaign. But their 
active enemy would allow them no rest. In the middle of winter, 
in spite of frost and snow, 'Turenne marched his troops through 
difficult mountain-passes to Belfort. The Germans, completely 
taken by surprise, were forced to retreat in confusion. A part of 
the army, rallied by the elector of Brandenburg, was routed at 
Turkheim by Turenne, who followed in swift pursuit. Alsace was 
completely recovered, and the victorious general returned in triumph 
to Paris. Altogether few years are so famous in the military annals 
of France as 1674. The Spanish attack on Roussillon was unim- 
portant, and was easily repulsed by Schomberg. 

§ 8. The campaign of 1675 was comparatively unimportant as 
regards great achievements. Sweden was at last induced to keep 
the promise made in 1671, and to attack Brandenburg. This forced 
the elector to withdraw his troops for the defence of his own 
country, and thus the imperial forces were greatly reduced. But in 
compensation for this Montecuculi reassumed the command. 
Turenne found his task much harder than in the preceding year, 
His first success was in defending Strasburg, and thus making 
Swabia instead of Alsace the seat of war. In the Black Forest six 
weeks of patient manceuvring ensued, in which the two generals dis- 
played all their skill in the space of a few square leagues. At last 
Turenne caught the enemy at a disadvantage, and was prepared to 
crush them, when he was killed by a stray bullet just as he made 
the final reconnaissance before the battle. The death of their 
greatest general was a far more serious loss to the French than any 
defeat could have been. The army at once withdrew across the 


A.D. 1674-1676. TURENNE AND MONTECUCULI. 227 


Rhine, and Montecuculi, obtaining a passage through Strasburg, 
was enabled to threaten Hagenau in Lower Alsace. At the same 
time the French suffered another disaster. The duke ot Lorraine 
had attacked the electorate of Trier, where he was opposed by an 
army under Marshal Crequi. At Saarbriick the French were com- 
pletely defeated, and soon afterwards Trier was taken. This was the 
last act of the old duke Charles LI., who died in September, having 
never been able to regain’ his lost duchy. Condé was now 
despatched to replace Turenne. With a skill and prudence worthy 
of his deceased rival, he forced Montecuculi to raise the siege of 
Hagenau, and ultimately drove him from Alsace. This was* the 
last campaign of both these great generals. Montecuculi, broken 
down in health, resigned his command. Condé retired into private 
life at Chantilly, where he solaced his remaining years with the 
most brilliant literary society of France. 

§ 9. In 1676 the loss of the great commanders is plainly visible in 
the comparative insignificance of the campaign. Louis commanded 
in person the army in Flanders, with the usual result. Condé and 
Beuchain were taken, but an excellent opportunity of defeating the 
prince of Orange was neglected. ‘The fault was so obvious that 
Louis was accused of personal cowardice. The true explanation seems 
to lie in his extravagant conception of his own dignity. He could not 
endure even to run the risk of a defeat in a pitched battle. Sieges, 
on the other hand, were comparatively secure. Louvois, though 
wanting in military genius, excelled in the management of the transit 
and supplies of troops. The engineering operations were safely 
entrusted to Vauban. Thus Louis’ successes, though not brilliant, 
were usually substantial. William of Orange made an effort to 
retake Maestricht, but was repulsed. On the Rhine the young 
Charles LY. of Lorraine succeeded his uncle in the command of the 
imperial army. He gained one great success in this year, the 
reduction of Philipsburg. But Luxemburg succeeded in excluding 
him from Alsace. It was on a wholly novel element, the sea, that 
France gained its most distinguished successes in 1676. With the 
support of France, Messina had revolted against Spain and main- 
tained its independence. The Spaniards called in the aid of the 
Dutch fleet under Ruyter. The French vessels were commanded 
by Duquesne, a really great admiral, who fought three brilliant 
actions against the combined fleet, in one of which Ruyter was 
killed. These maritime successes were due in the first place to the 
reforms of Colbert, and made a profound impression in Europe. 
Hitherto the French had been powerless on the sea, but if they once 
gained the supremacy there, as well as on land, they would become 
invincible. 


228 MODERN EUROPE. ' Qsap. xm: 


France had made great exertions during these years, and was 
beginning to show signs of exhaustion. Colbert had always been 
opposed to the war, partly because it gave Louvois an influence 
superior to his own, partly because it ruined his ‘financial policy. 
All his reforms had to be given up one by one; new offices were 
created and sold; the taille had to be raised; even the old system 
of loans was revived. France was again suffering from exactions 
like those of Richelieu and Mazarin. Discontent produced revolts 
in Normandy, Brittany and Guienne. It was obvious that the glory 
of resisting all Europe was not without its drawbacks. Louis 
seriously desired peace. This he still hoped to gain by a separate 
negotiation with the Dutch. But William of Orange and the 
emperor were determined to prolong the war until some adequate 
security was obtained against French ambition. Louis determined 
to force on a peace by an energetic prosecution of the war. In 1677 
he appeared in Flanders, and took Valenciennes and Cambray. His 
brother, the duke of Orleans; laid siege to St. Omer, and when 
William of Orange advanced to its relief, inflicted a severe defeat 
on him at Cassel. By this victory he secured the French hold on 
Flanders, but earned his brother’s jealousy. Louis could not pardon 
a success more brilliant than he had ever gained, and Orleans was 
never again entrusted with a command. On the Rhine Créqui com- 
manded instead of Luxemburg. He had learnt wisdom from his defeat 
at Saarbrtick, and henceforth sought to emulate the prudent strategy 
of Turenne rather than the brilliant rashness of Condé. The result 
was a most successful campaign against the duke of Lorraine. The 
latter tried to effect a junction with Orange, but found the way 
barred; then he turned to meet the army of the circles which was 
advancing from Germany to assist him, but Créqui out-marched 
him, and completely routed the Germans. After inflicting a defeat 
on the duke of Lorraine in Alsace, Créqui concluded the year by 
taking Freiburg (Nov. 1677). 

These brilliant successes increased the desire for peace, especially 
among the Dutch, who, having secured their independence, had 
everything to lose by the continuance of the war. - But William of 
Orange was conscious that his life’s task was to oppose Louis XIV. 
His point of view was European rather than national. The result 
was division and disaffection in Holland. The old republican party, 
apparently crushed by De Witt’s death, once more raised its head. 
In opposition to the stadtholder, the states sent envoys to negotiate 
with the French at Nimwegen. William, thus deserted by his 
subjects, sought to strengthen himself by an English alliance. He 
induced Charles II. to consent to his marriage with Mary, daughter 
of the duke of York. By allying himself with the opposition party 


Av. 1677-1679. PEACE OF NIMWEGEN. 229 


in Parliament, he even forced the English king to declare war 
against France. Louis was compelled to make new efforts, and to 
concentrate his forces. Messina was evacuated, and left to the 
tender mercies of Spain, Créqui again defeated the duke of 
Lorraine, and drove him from Alsace into the Palatinate. Louis 
himself again entered Flanders and captured Ghent. 

§ 10. These events gave a final impulse to the negotiations at 
Nimwegen. On August 11, 1678, the first treaty was signed between 
France and Holland. Four days afterwards, William of Orange, 
still anxious to make peace impossible, made a desperate attack on 
the army of Luxemburg before Mons, but was repulsed. It has 
never been definitely known whether William was or was not 
cognisant at the time that peace had been made. Spain accepted 
a treaty in September. The emperor continued to hold out, but at 
last, hampered by a revolt in Hungary, he came to terms in February, 
1679. France was the only gainer by a war which she had 
wantonly provoked. Holland lost nothing, as Maestricht, the last 
remnant of the French conquests, was restored, and an advan- 
tageous treaty of commerce was arranged. Spain, as the weakest 
of the allies, had to make the greatest sacrifices. Franche-Comté 
was irrevocably renounced, and all the important frontier towns 
of the Netherlands were handed over to France. ‘The treaty with 
the emperor restored the arrangements of Westphalia, with the 
exception that Freiburg was given to France in exchange for 
Philipsburg. The duke of Lorraine was to be restored on the same 
‘terms as had been laid down in the peace of the Pyrenees, but these 
were rejected by Charles IV., and his duchy remained in French 
hands. The Great Elector of Brandenburg refused to consent to the 
French demands that all conquests made from Sweden during the 
war should be restored. But the appearance of Créqui on the Elbe 
forced him into acquiescence, and a treaty was signed in June, 
1679. Two months afterwards Denmark also came to terms, and 
thus the war ended in the general pacification of Kurope. 

§ 11. Louis XIV. was now at the height of his glory. Single- 
handed he had confronted the allied powers of Europe, and had 
emerged from the contest victorious. In the invasion of Holland he 
had broken through the oldest and wisest traditions of French policy, 
but the vast resources of his country and the concentration of 
national forces under his predecessors enabled him to escape the 
consequences of his error. From this time, however, the period of 
decadence sets in. The brilliant successes of his early years are 
soon forgotten amidst the disasters that attend the close of his 
reign. ‘The magnanimous and popular prince who so boldly grasped 
the reins of government as they fell from the hands of Mazarin, 


230 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP, XIII. 


‘sinks gradually into the gloomy and bigoted tyrant, dreaded by all 
Europe and by his own subjects. The servility and adulatior 
which surrounded Louis in the years following the peace of Nim- 
wegen would have turned the head of any mortal. Flattery almost 
gave place to worship. Louis fell an easy victim to temptation, and 
became intoxicated with the idea of his own greatness and invin- 
cible power. Opposition was unbearable from an equal, still more 
from a subject. He refused to live any longer at the Louvre in the 


midst of the citizens, and built for himself the enormous and ' 


wearisome palace at Versailles, which remains an apt memorial of 
his character and his reign. To defray the immense expenses, Colbert 
had to continue those financial expedients which had been forced 
on him by the war, but which ruined all his previous schemes. 
If he ventured the slightest remonstrance, Louis crushed him by a 
reference to the superior devotion of his rival Louvois. While the 
people groaned under the taxes levied to support the royal luxury, 
the nobles were degraded from all political importance to become 
the valets of their sovereign. Representatives of the great houses 
of France were content to hold the towel at the king’s toilet instead 
of wielding the marshal’s baton. Military and official posts were 
conferred on members of the middle class whose servility was 
assured. The patronage of literature, for which Louis has been so 
undeservedly praised, was regulated not so much by the merits of a 
writer as by his talents as a courtier and a sycophant. Everything 
was made to centre round the king and court. All that was 
healthy and independent either in thought or action, was sedu- 
lously stifled. In 1683 one of the last securities for a moderate 
government was removed by the death of Colbert, who had striven 
against much that he had been unable to prevent, and had acted as 
some counterpoise to the baneful influence of Louvois. That 
minister now became supreme in the royal council. At the same 
time a new actor appeared prominently on the scene, who shares 
with Louvois the control of the king in the ensuing period. 
Louis XIV.’s first mistress was Louise de la Valliére, who had 
really loved him and who retired to a convent. She was succeeded 
by the bold and brilliant Madame de Montespan, who for many 
years was supreme at court, but who was never allowed to exert any 
political influence. It was she who introduced to the king’s notice 
the lady who was destined to be her rival and successor. Francoise 
dAubigny, noted for her beauty and ability, was the widow of the 
burlesque writer of the Fronde, Scarron. After his death she was 
reduced to great poverty until she was induced by Madame de 
Montespan to undertake the charge of the king’s natural children. 
Louis himself for a long time disliked her, though he gave her the 


Aw. 1678-1683. THE REUNIONS. - 231 


territory of Maintenon from which she took her historical name. 
Gradually he became accustomed to her society till he could no 
longer dispense with it. The new favourite was a prude. She got 
rid of Madame de Montespan by effecting a reconciliation between 
Louis and his wife Maria Theresa. When the latter died in 1683, 
the king was privately married to Madame de Maintenon. Her 
character has been the subject-of endless dispute, but there can be 
no doubt of her immense influence on the history of France. 


JI. Tue Reunions. Reuicious Persecurioy. Tue LEAGue 
or AUGSBURG. 


§ 12. Advantageous as the -treaty of Nimwegen was to France, 
it was regarded by Louis only as the basis of new acquisitions. He 
was determined to make France impregnable to external invasion. 
Vauban was employed to erect fortresses on every side of the French 
border. But there were still some points on the frontier which 
were not strong enough in a military point of view. Especially the 
Three Bishoprics and Alsace were exposed to attack. This Louis 
was determined to remedy without any regard to law or equity. 
He found his opportunity in the indefinite wording of the treaties 
of Westphalia and the Pyrenees. For instance, Metz, Toul, and 
Verdun had been ceded to France “ with their dependencies,” and 
this phrase was capable of various interpretations. Again, in 
Alsace the immediate vassals of the Empire had retained their 
independence, but the question arose as to who was really such an 
immediate vassal. And, moreover, subjection to the Empire was 
altogether a different thing to subjection to France. The Empire 
was avery loosely connected body in which the various units did 
much as they pleased. In France, on the other hand, there was a 
highly centralised government, which allowed no independent 
action whatever. Hitherto France, occupied with the Fronde and 
with foreign wars, had allowed these important questions to remain 
unsettled. But now that Europe desired peace, Louis determined 
to settle all these disputes for his own advantage. The parliament 
of Metz was ordered to find out all the dependencies of the Three 
Bishoprics, and they were speedily compelled to acknowledge French 
suzerainty. At Breisach a provincial court was erected to decide 
on the limits of Louis’ rights in Alsace. A similar assembly in 
Besangon was to act in Franche-Comté. These are the famous 
“Chambers of Reunion,” which claimed the powers of an international 
tribunal. The treaties which France had made with foreign powers 
were to be interpreted at the pleasure of France alone. These 
‘assumptions, bold and unparalleled as they were, aroused the mis- 


232 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. xumI. 


trust but not the opposition of Europe. Louis had kept his army 
on a war footing, while his rivals had disbanded theirs. The 
chamber of Breisach awarded to France the complete suzerainty of 
Alsace. The lesser imperial vassals had to submit at once, and the 
free city of Strasburg, suddenly attacked by an army under Louvois, 
was compelled to surrender (Sept. 1681). On the very same 
day the fortress of Casale in Italy, which had been of such im- 
portance in the time of Richelieu, was ceded to France by Charles 
of Mantua. Not content with these acquisitions, Louis demanded 
Alost from Spain, and to enforce the demand laid siege to Luxem- 
burg, a fortress which he ardently coveted. 

Louis was very fortunate in the moment which he chose for 
these unheard-of aggressions. Spain was powerless without allies. 
William of Orange, eager for war, was hampered by the republican 
party, which insisted on peace. In Germany, the elector of 
Brandenburg, who had raised himself to the rank of a great power, 
was so disgusted with his treatment by the emperor in the recent 
negotiations that he had formed an alliance with France. The 
emperor himself, on whom devolved the duty of defending his out- 
lying frontiers, was occupied with a revolt in Hungary, which was 
now complicated by a Turkish war. In 1683, for the second time 
in history, the Turks advanced to the siege of Vienna. No event 
could have been more advantageous for Louis, though he had 
probably done nothing to encourage the invasion. With a show of 
magnanimity he raised the siege of Luxemburg to allow the 
Spaniards to assist Austria against the infidel. But Vienna was 
saved by the heroism of John Sobieski, king of Poland, and France 
alone refused to share the transports of Europe. Louis at once 
resumed his hostilities against Spain. Courtrai, Dixmude, and 
lastly Luxemburg were taken. Still Europe refused to check the 
French advance. In August, 1684, a twenty years’ truce was 
concluded with Holland,-Spain and the Empire. Louis kept 
possession of Luxemburg, and the legality of the “reunions” was 
virtually recognised. About the same time Louis sought to 
establish his naval supremacy in the Mediterranean. Merely 
because Genoa had preferred a Spanish to a French alliance, the 
unfortunate city was bombarded and forced to make a humiliating 
submission. 

§ 13. Louis’ absolutist tendencies were to the full as conspicuous in 
his domestic as in his foreign policy. After the lapse of more than 
half a century, France was again agitated by religious disputes. 
The great questions of the day were, the schism of the Jansenists, 
the relations of the Gallican church to Rome, and the position 
of the Huguenots as an independent sect. The French church 


A.p. 1681—1684. THE JANSENISTS. Waa 


was at this time dominated by the Jesuits, who supplied the 
royal confessor, Pere la Chaise. The famous order had sadly 
degenerated from the principles of Loyola. They had become more 
secular and more greedy of power and riches. The old unhesitating 
obedience to authority had disappeared, and in 1651 we hear of a 
general of the order being deposed. Always anxious to be on the 
winning side, the Jesuits had given up their close alliance with 
Spain and attached themselves to the House of Bourbon. Louis 
could rely upon them for support even against the papacy, which 
they had been founded to defend. And this worldly ambition had 
brought with it graver moral defects. Their system of casuistry 
taught them to find excuses for the worst vices so long as the end 
was laudable. Their influence and teaching tended to iower the 
whole moral and religious tone of the people. Against this influ- 
ence a natural reaction set in, of which the Jansenists were the 
foremost representatives. Cornelius Jansen and Jean du Vergier, 
two fellow-students at Louvain, were the founders of the new sect. 
Jansen become bishop of Ypres, and in 1635 produced his Augustinus, 
in which he laid down his-theological principles. Du Vergier was 
made abbot of St. Cyran and inculcated the same principles by his 
life and personal influence. The centre of the Jansenists was the 
monastery of Port Royal and a neighbouring retreat, where there 
were soon collected a number of the most eminent men in France, 
including Pascal, Arnauld, Nicole, Tillemont and Racine. The 
Jesuit casuistry was based upon the doctrine of free-will, and the 
Jansenists developed the counter-theory of predestination, which 
they found in the writings of Augustine. In their strictness of 
life and in many of their dogmas they resembled the Calvinists, 
and they have been called the ‘ Puritans of Catholicism.” But 
they differed from the Protestants in the weight which they 
attached to tradition and the fathers, and they clung steadfastly to 
the idea of the universal church. From the first the sect had to 
make its way against opposition. Richelieu, who dreaded the 
appearance of new Huguenots, persecuted them and even imprisoned 
St. Cyran. But after his death their influence revived and spread 
itself. During the Fronde they supported De Retz, and thus drew 
on themselves the enmity of Mazarin. In 1653 the pope, Innocent X., 
was induced to issue a bull condemning five propositions which 
were supposed to be found in the Awgustinus of Jansen. A form of 
declaration was drawn up, and approved by the French government 
and a clerical assembly. This the Jansenists were called upon to 
accept. But they denied that the propositions were to be found in 
Jansen’s book, and they maintained that the papal infallibility did 
not extend. to matters of fact. Threats and persecutions were 


12 


234 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. XIII. 


unable to make them yield. In 1654 Pascal published the famous 
‘Provincial Letters,’ a satire on the principles of the Jesuists so 
vigorous and incisive that the order never really recovered its hold 
on the popular confidence. Their enmity against the Jansenists 
kecame more bitter than ever, but they failed to crush them 
The question of the papal bull remained unsettled till 1669, when 
a compromise was accepted by Clement IX. The Jansenists 
agreed to condemn the five propositions as heretical, but reserved 
the question as to whether they were really taken from their 
teacher’s book. I'rom this time they again revived; some of 
them gained preferment in the church, and their doctrines spread 
into other countries. Louis XLV. hated them, partly as a remnant 
of the old Fronde, partly because they held the ecclesiastical power 
to be independent of the state, and partly because he personally 
favoured the Jesuits. They were thus opposed both by the king and 
by the pope, and were only saved from destruction by the want of 
unity between their opponents. 

§ 14. Louis XIV. wished to be supreme in the church as well as in 
the state, and this necessarily brought him into collision with the 
rival authority of the papacy. Moreover the popes at this time were 
afraid of the rising French power, and usually sided with the House 
of Hapsburg, and for this Louis revenged himself by encroaching 
on their spiritual power. The basis of the royal power in church 
affairs was the so-called regale, the king’s right to receive the 
revenues of a vacant bishopric, and to appoint to all the livings 
that belonged to it. This right had always been exercised by 
the French kings except in Guienne, Languedoc, Provence and 
Dauphiné. Louis, conscious of his power, wished to extend it to 
these four provinces. The two bishops of Pamier and Alais, who 
were Jansenists and wished to restrict secular interference, pro- 
tested against this extension of the royal power, and appealed to 
the pope. Innocent XI. at once took up their cause, and forbade 
the king to proceed with his design. But Louis, religious and 
orthodox as he was, would not yield to papal authority. The 
clergy, and especially the Jesuits, had always been on his side, and 
he summoned a national synod in 1682. They approved of the 
extension of the regale, and drew up four general propositions, viz., 
that the temporal power is independent of the spiritual: that a 
general council is superior to the pope: that the papal authority 
cannot alter the usages of the Gallican church: and that papal 
decisions, even in matters of faith, are not valid till they have 
received the consent of the church. This was a great victory for 
Louis. The clergy combined with the king to exclude the 
domination of the papacy as a foreign power. This was a great 


A.D. 1682-1684. PERSECUTION OF THE HUGUENOTS. 235 


advance both for the unity of the nation and for the royal 
supremacy. But the opposition to the papacy involved not the 
slightest tendency to a change in doctrine. Louis, under the 
influence of Madame de Maintenon, was more rigidly orthodox than 
ever. At the very time that he was quarrelling with the head of 
his church, he was preparing to render an acceptable service to that 
church by the suppression of heresy in France. 

§ 15. Ever since the fall of La Rochelle and the treaty of Alais, the 
Huguenots had lived peaceably in the enjoyment of the religious 
liberty that had been left to them. During the Fronde they had 
remained perfectly quiet, and had thus earned the gratitude of the 
king. One of Louis’ first acts was a promise to observe the Idict 
of Nantes. During the early part of his reign the Huguenots were 
unmolested. Excluded from direct military or political employ- 
ment, they devoted themselves with the more ardour to industry, 
and especially to financial administration. Colbert found in them 
his ablest and most trustworthy instruments. So peaceful and 
prosperous was the Calvinist population, that Louis conceived the 
idea of effecting their reunion with the church. The rejection of 
this scheme by a synod in 1678 hurt the king’s self-love, and pro- 
produced the first ill-will against the Huguenots. It was at this 
time that he was at war with. Holland, and though there was no 
trace of an alliance, he was irritated to think that a portion of his 
subjects had common religious interests and sympathy with his 
enemies. The devoticn of the French clergy, who in 1675 made 
him an extraordinary grant for the war, seemed to merit some 
grateful return. From this time the court began to aim at the 
conversion of the Huguenots, at first by rewards and favours 
showered on those who came over, afterwards by more violent 
measures. Every possible form of oppression was resorted to 
that did not run directly counter to the letter of the Edict of 
Nantes. The conversion of a Catholic to the reformed faith was 
forbidden under the severest penalties. Mixed marriages were pro- 
hibited. Huguenots were excluded from all financial employment, 
from municipal offices, and from the legal and medical professions. 
The taille was doubly assessed upon them, and on the slightest pre- 
text their churches were demolished by the orthodox parliaments. 
Many of the oppressed sect sought a refuge from persecution in 
voluntary exile. But emigration was forbidden by a royal edict. 
Risings broke out in the Cevennes and other provinces, but were 
speedily put down by force. Louvois now hit on a characteristic 
scheme for procuring conversions. Troops were quartered on 
Huguenot households till they abjured their faith. Military 
brutality proved a most effective missionary instrument. Every 


236 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. xiIt. 


day came the news of numerous conversions. Louis was persuaded by 
his ministers that the one thing necessary to complete the work 
was that the royal will should be finally and unhesitatingly 
expressed. This could be most effectively done by the revocation 
of the Edict of Nantes. The king at first hesitated to take such 
an extreme step. France had obtained its greatness by alliance 
with the Protestants. To undo the great work of Henry IY. 
would be to break with the most serviceable of French allies. Had 
war with the Hapsburgs been going on, the act would have been 
impossible. But Europe was at peace, and had conclusively shown 
its desire to remain so. England, once the champion of Protes- 
tantism, was now under James II., from whom applause rather 
then opposition was expected. At last Louis determined on the 
most fatal measure of his reign. On Oct. 22, 1685, appeared an 
edict by which the Huguenots were deprived of all the privileges 
conferred on them by the Edict of Nantes or the treaty of Alais; 
the reformed worship. was prohibited; the ministers were to be 
exiled, and the churches destroyed; emigration was forbidden 
under penalty of the galleys. The only concession made was a 
promise of liberty of conscience, so long as no public worship took 
place. The edict was welcomed with extravagant applause by the 
Catholic world. Innocent XI. alone, jealous of Louis’ power, and 
personally inclined to mild measures, looked on in gloomy dis- 
approval. But the measure was fatal to the real interests of 
France, both external and internal. The prohibition of emigration 
could not be enforeed. More than half a million of the most in- 
telligent and industrious population of France crossed the borders 
and carried their skill to more tolerant countries—to England, 
Holland, and Prussia. By the gain of those countries may be 
measured the loss of France. The industrial life which Colbert 
had hoped to create and stimulate, seemed to be irretrievably 
ruined. And the moral and intellectual energies of the people were 
no less seriously injured. Louis XIV. may have been: misled and 
misinformed by Louvois, he may have been influenced by the milder 
bigotry of Madame de Maintenon, but on his head must rest the 
ultimate responsibility of the measure which did such infinite 
damage to France, and which far outweighs any benefits that his 
earlier government may have conferred on his subjects. 

§ 16. In foreign politics the effect of the revocation of the Edict of 
Nantes was equally disastrous, and was more immediately felt. 
All the Protestant allies of France were completely alienated. In 
Holland William of Orange was enabled to triumph over the 
republican party, which had hitherto tied his hands. The elector 
of Brandenburg, who had closely allied himself with Louis in 


A.D. 1685-1686. LEAGUE OF AUGSBURG. B87 


opposition to the emperor, changed his attitude, and made up all 
his differences with Austria. The influence which France had 
obtained over the German princes by the League of the Rhine was 
~ overthrown. Louis had schemed for the transference of the Empire 
to himself, that was henceforth hopeless. The aggressions of Louis 
on the frontiers of Germany, hitherto unopposed and condoned by 
the truce of 1684, would no longer be tolerated. In 1685 the 
elector palatine Charles died, the last male of the House of 
Simmern. ‘The electorate passed to Philip William cf the line of 
Neuburg. But Louis at once claimed great part of the Lower 
Palatinate, in right of Charles’ sister, the wife of his brother Philip 
of Orleans. Germany raised itself to oppose the claim. In July, 
1686, a defensive league was concluded at Augsburg between the 
emperor, Spain, Sweden, Holland and almost all the German princes 
and circles. In the next year it was joined by the elector of Bavaria, 
the duke of Saxony, and the chief independent states of Italy. . The 
pope, Innocent XI., gave it his secret support. We can see how 
completely Louis XIV.’s ambition and bigotry had reversed the 
attitude of the European powers. Formerly France had supported 
Protestantism in its resistance to the great Catholic power of the 
House of Hapsburg. Now Spain and Austria—even the Pope 
himself—were leagued with the Protestant powers to-check the 
aggressions of France in the sphere both of politics and of religion, 

There was still one important power whose adhesion to the league 
against Louis seemed necessary to ensure its success. England 
which, under Elizabeth and Cromwell, had been the champion of 
Protestantism, was now ruled by the bigoted and impracticable 
James II. So far from disapproving of Louis’ actions, he showed a 
desire to imitate them in his own country. Like his predecessor, 
Charles II., he relied upon French subsidies and French troops to 
crush any discontent among his subjects. ‘This discontent he 
speedily aroused. In a reign of only three years (1685-1688), he 
succeeded in completely alienating every class. His attack on the 
established church evoked the opposition of the most ordeily and 
submissive of his subjects. The malcontents turned naturally to 
William of Orange, whose wife was James’ daughter and presumptive 
heiress. The unexpected birth of a son to the king suddenly 
removed all prospect of a Protestant succession, and rendered 
prompt measures necessary for the protection of civil and religious 
liberty. It was determined to invite the Prince of Orange to England 
to effect a settlement. But in existing circumstances such an act was 
of European, as well as insular, importance. William was the bitter 
and avowed opponent of the French king, his success was certain to 
involve England in the great conflict impending on the continent. 


238 MODERN EUROPE. CHap, xim. 


So intense was the hostility which Louis had excited, that the 
Catholic powers of Europe, the pope at their head, were inclined to 
support a scheme which must result in the triumph of English 
Protestantism, and which might involve the deposition of a ~ 
legitimate and Catholic sovereign. Every risk must be ran in 
order to deprive France of so important an ally. 

§ 17. It was manifest that Louis’ position was a very critical one, 
and required the most cautious action. He had no ally of importance 
except the Turks, and they were now being decidedly worsted in the 
war with Austria. In 1688, the great fortress of Belgrade was taken 
by the imperial army, and the Porte was forced to sue for terms. 
But Louis obstinately refused to yield in the face of any difficulties. 
Not only did he continue to prefer his claims in the Palatinate, he 
prepared for a new and more offensive intervention in’ German 
affairs. For a long time he had been in the closest alliance with 
the electors of Cologne, and this alliance was of great moment as 
securing the French on the Rhine. In 1688 the archbishop 
Maximilian Henry died, and the eyes of Kurope were turned on the 
election of his successor. ‘The French party, which included the 
majority of the chapter, put forward William of Fiirstenberg, a 
vassal of Louis, who had been coadjutor under the late elector. 
But the emperor was determined not to allow so great a principality 
to remain practically subject to France. He put forward an 
opposition candidate, Joseph Clement, brother of the elector of 
Bavaria. The imperial intervention had some weight with the 
chapter, and Fiirstenberg only obtained thirteen votés out of twenty- 
four, while his rival received nine. But for a legitimate election 
two thirds of the votes were required, and the dispute had to be 
referred to the pope. Innocent XI. had many grounds for quarrel 
with Louis XIV., and to these had been added a recent grievance. 
A frequent source of abuse in Rome had been the franchises claimed 
by foreign ambassadors, which enabled them to shelter any persons, 
however criminal, who sought refuge in the neighbourhood of their 
residence. Innocent had issued a decree abolishing these franchises. 
Louis XILY., with characteristic haughtiness, refused to give up the 
privileges of his embassy at the command of the pope. An envoy 
was sent to Rome with a military escort to enforce his pretensions. 
The pope excommunicated the ambassador, and France and Rome 
were again at open war with each other. It was obviously the 
interest of Innocent to check Louis’ power in every way. He at 
once declared Joseph Clement to be the lawful .archbishop of 
Cologne. The French king, afraid of losing his hold on Cologne, 
replied by acknowledging Fiirstenberg and announcing his intention 
to uphold him. 


A.D. 1688-1689. THE ENGLISH REVOLUTION. 239 


But meanwhile the interests of France were still more directly 
threatened by William of Orange’s projected expedition to England. 
Louis sent urgent warnings to James II. and threatened to attack 
Holland. But James, with his usual stupid arrogance, refused to 
listen to the warnings, and declared that his position was weakened 
by the open avowal of the French alliance. Louis had to act for 
himself. His council was divided as to the measures to be taken, 
Seignelay, Colbert’s son, who was minister of the revenue, urged 
war against Holland both by land and sea. But Louvois, always 
jeaious of the Colbert family, and fearing that a naval war might 
increase his rival’s influence, advised an immediate attack upon 
Germany. His opinion was adopted by the king. Anarmy under 
the dauphin laid siege to Philipsburg, and the skill of Vauban 
compelled its speedy surrender. The League of Augsburg was 
entirely unprepared for war, and in an incredibly short space of 
time the four Rhenish electorates were at the feet of France. The 
Palatinate was devastated for the second time. Louis’ attack upon 
Germany decided the fate of England. William of Orange, freed 
from the danger of French invasion, hastened his preparations, and 
on Noy. 11, 1688, sailed for England. James II. showed as much 
abject cowardice in danger as foolish confidence beforehand. Deser- 
tions from his army and his own family convinced him of the utter 
hopelessness of resistance, and he fled from the capital. Captured 
and brought back again he availed himself of the opportunity 
offered by his crafty opponent, and escaped to France. ‘There 
Louis received him with great pomp, and magnanimously allowed 
him to maintain an expensive court at St. Germains. William, 
with his wife Mary, received the English crown, and one of his first 
acts was to secure the admission of England into the League of 
Augsburg. Thus the circle of Louis’ enemies was completed. The 
Revolution of 1688, to which his own errors essentially contributed, 
marks the triumph of those principles to which the French king 
was most diametrically opposed. 

§ 18. In 1689 the war became general. The object of the allies 
was to enforce a return to the state of things recognised by the 
treaty of the Pyrenees. Louis fought to retain, and, if possible, 
to extend his acquisitions. France had to face attack on every 
side, on the Pyrenees from Spain, on the east from the combined 
forces of Holland, Germany, and the Spanish Netherlands, on the 
Italian frontier from Savoy. At the same time the coast had to be 
defended against the two great maritime powers, England and 
Holland. So immense were the resources of France, and so admir- 
able the machinery for employing them, that all these tasks were 
performed at once. Louis had never less than four armies in the 


240 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. xu. 


field, and sometimes as many as six. Nor were the allies on their 
side wanting in energy. Germany alone furnished three armies. 
One under the prince of Waldeck advanced to co-operate with the 
Dutch, English and Spaniards in the Netherlands, and defeated the 
French under d’Humiéres at Valcourt. Two others, commanded 
respectively by the elector of Brandenburg and the duke of Lorraine, 
undertook to drive the French from their recent conquests on the 
Rhine. Kaiserwerth, Bonn, and Mainz were captured. But these 
early reverses only roused Louis to greater efforts. The ablest of 
surviving French generals, Luxemburg, was sent to the Nether- 
lands, the most important scene of war. Marshal Boufflers was to 
act on the Moselle, and the dauphin, under the supervision of de 
Lorges, on the Rhine. Catinat, hardly inferior to Luxemburg in 
ability, was sent against Savoy, while the duke de Noailles led a 
fifth army across the Pyrenees into Catalonia. It is impossible to 
follow the details of these various campaigns. Everywhere the 
French held their own, and even won battles, but the numerical 
superiority of the allies always neutralised the importance of these 
successes. Luxemburg defeated Waldeck at the battle of Fleurus 
(1690), but the enemy was immediately reinforced by the elector of 
Brandenburg, and the French could make no adyance. More 
brilliant, though not more lasting, were the achievements of Catinat 
on the Italian frontier. Victor Amadeus of Savoy had joined the 
League of Augsburg in the hope of restoring to his duchy the great 
fortresses of Pinerolo and Casale, which were the basis of French 
influence in Italy. At first there seemed little prospect of his 
hopes being realised. Catinat crushed his forces at Staffarda (1690), 
and in a short time conquered almost the whole of Savoy. In the 
next year he reduced Nice and Montmélian. And while the French 
retained their supremacy on land, they almost succeeded in estab- 
lishing a similar supremacy on the sea. In the same year (1690), 
their admiral, Tourville, succeeded in defeating the combined 
English and Dutch fleets off Beachy Head. 

While France was making these marvellous but exhausting 
exertions by land and sea, Louis was by no means forgetful of the 
interests of James II. A French force escorted him to Ireland, 
where he soon obtained almost universal recognition. It was only in 
the Protestant north that opposition was to be dreaded. It would 
have been the most complete triumph for Louis XIV.’s policy if 
England could have been conquered from the side of Ireland. But 
William III. did not wait for an invasion. He hurried to meet the 
enemy, and the battle of the Boyne (July 1, 1690) decided the 
contest. James again fled to France, and William’s generals were 
left to continue the reduction of Ireland. It was completed in 


A.D. 1689-1692. DEATH OF LOUVOIS. z4h 


1691 by the pacification of Limerick. The success of William of 
Orange was a terrible blow to Louis. The combined English and 
Dutch forces were now free to act directly against France, and 
William was able to bring his abilities and his dauntless resolution 
to the assistance of the allies. 

§ 19. Louis XIV., as if conscious that the war in the Netherlands 
was dignified by the presence of his great rival, appeared to take 
the command in person. But as usual when he was there none 
but the safest enterprises were undertaken. Mons was besieged 
in form, and taken by the skill of Vauban. William advanced to 
relieve it, but found the covering army too strong and had to retire. 
The capture of Mons, and Catinat’s successes in Savoy, were the cnly 
military events of importance in 1691. More memorable than 
anything else was the death of Louvois, the suggester of Louis’ 
unscrupulous policy and therefore the real originator of the war. 
His royal master had for some time been weary of him, and his 
death was so sudden that reports were circulated and believed of 
poison administered by order either of the king or of Madame de 
Maintenon. Louvois was the last able minister of Louis XIV. 
The military administration was entrusted to his son, Barbesieux, 
but he was young and incapable. The king had become so feebly 
jealous of power that he could not bear the presence of able men. 
Henceforth he surrounded himself with second-rate officials, and 
trusted more and more to his own impulses or the suggestions ot 
Madame de Maintenon. 

Great preparations were made for the campaign of 1692. Louis 
was determined on a fresh undertaking in favour of James II. 
Tourville, the admiral who had been so successful two years before, 
was ordered to convey the deposed king to Ireland. Great expecta- 
tions were based upon the popularity of James with the English 
fleet ; he had even a secret correspondence with the admiral, Russell. 
But Russell refused to recognise even his legitimate king on the deck 
of a French vessel. In the battle of La Hogue, the French showed 
conspicuous bravery, but Tourville was forced by superior numbers 
to a disastrous retreat. ‘The expedition was now impossible, and 
England regained her naval superiority. Henceforth the maritime 
successes of the French were limited to the raids on Dutch and 
English commerce of adventurous privateers sucn as Jean Bart. 
Colbert’s son, Seignelay, who had done so much for the French 
navy, had died soon after the victory of 1690. His successor, 
Pontchartrain, was, like all Louis’ later ministers, incapable. By 
land the French had still the upper hand, Louis again commanded 
the army and attacked Namur. The siege is reckoned as Vauban’s 
masterpiece, ane the fortress was defended by the second engineer 

12 


242, MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. XIII. 


of the age, Cohorn. William’s attempt at relief was frustrated by 
Luxemburg, and Namur surrendered. Jouis had now a great 
opportunity of crushing his enemy, but as usual he refused to risk 
a battle, and soon afterwards returned to France. Luxemburg, who 
was left behind with diminished forces, was drawn by William into 
a trap at Steinkirk, but he extricated himself with masterly energy 
and skill, and the allied forces were compelled to retreat. Neither 
side seemed able to gain any decisive success. France was 
exhausted by its unparalleled exertions, and disaffection began to 
make itself heard. Louis had great difficulty in obtaining the 
necessary supplies. It was not till June, 1698, that he was able to 
take the field, and this delay gave the allies time to prepare their 
defence. On arriving in the Netherlands, Louis refused to venture 
an assault on William’s position, and quitted the army without 
having achieved anything. It was his most conspicuous military 
failure, and he never again assumed the command. It was to no 
purpose that Luxemburg defeated the allies at Neerwinden. ‘The 
only result was the capture of Charleroi. In the next year the 
French were forced to stand altogether on the defensive, and in 
January, 1695, Luxemburg died. Meanwhile Catinat was holding 
his ground in Savoy, even against the rising Austrian commander, 
prince Eugene. Eugene was French on his father’s side, and 
Italian by his mother, who was one of Mazarin’s nieces. But, 
slighted by Louis, he had thrown himself altogether on to the side of 
the emperor. In 1692 the forces of Savoy had the better of the 
conflict, and even attempted an invasion of Dauphiné. But the 
next year Catinat defeated them at Marsaglia and reconquered 
Piedmont. In Catalonia Noailles gained still more conspicuous 
successes. 

§ 20. But all these heroic efforts served only to prolong a conflict 
which was already decided by the exhaustion of France, In 
response to the royal demands, all classes, and especially the clergy, 
had made great voluntary sacrifices, but this could not go on for ever. 
The financial administration had fallen into very incompetent 
hands since Colbert’s death, but even Colbert could hardly have 
coped with existing difficulties. Not only had the annual expendi- 
ture risen to an unexampled amount, but the sources of revenue 
were proportionately diminished. The Huguenots had carried 
with them much of the wealth of France, and their departure had 
inflicted irreparable damage on French industries. Commerce and 
the colonies suffered from the attacks of English and Dutch. Even 
the coasts were no longer secure, The English fleet bombarded 
Havre and Dunkirk, and it was feared that they might effect a 
landing. To these internal misfortunes were now added military 


they 


wee 


: 
7 
a 
¥. 
‘ 


A.D. 1692-1697. TREATY OF RYSWICK. 243 


reverses. In 1695 William of Orange with the assistance of Cohorn 
retook Namur. The energetic defence of the commander, Boufflers, 
and the attempted relief by Villeroy, Luxemburg’s successor, proved 
fruitless. It was evidently necessary for France to obtain peace, 
Louis had already withdrawn many of the obnoxious demands 
which he had put forward at the commencement of the war, but 
without satisfying the allies. He now determined to break up the 
hostile league by separate negotiations. The duke of Savoy, whose 
interest in the war was purely selfish, was easily induced to come 
over to the side of France by the restitution of all his territories, 
including Richelieuw’s great acquisitions, Pinerolo and Casale. His 
daughter was married to Louis’ grandson, the duke of Burgundy. 
It was an enormous sacrifice both of power and dignity for Louis 
to make, but it produced the desired result. The neutrality of 
Italy being secured, he was able to strengthen his forces at other 
points. The allies, weakened by the defection of Savoy, consented 
to accept the mediation of Charles XI. of Sweden, and a diplomatic 
conference was opened in May, 1697, at Ryswick, half way between 
the Hague and Delft. 

The difficulties in the way of peace were great and numerous. 
Many of the demands were regarded by Louis as inconsistent with 
his honour and dignity as well as with his interests. Spain wished 
to restore the treaty of the Pyrenees, Germany that of Westphalia. 
And above all there was the bitter but inevitable necessity of 
acknowledging the legality of the English revolution. Fortunately 
for France the interests of the allies were not identical, and it was 
possible by satisfying one to limit the concessions to the other. 
Louis determined to expedite matters by an accommodation with 
William III. The treaty between England and France was not 
settled by the diplomatists at Ryswick, but by a private conference 
between Bentinck, William’s friend and confidant, and the French 
marshal, Boufflers. Louis agreed to acknowledge William III. as 
king of England, and to withhold all assistance from his enemies. 
But with a magnanimity becoming a great king, he refused to 
listen to the demand for the expulsion of James I. from French 
soil. On these terms William undertook to manage Austria and 
Spain, who were anxious to continue the war. Spain was forced to 
a decision by the news that Barcelona had surrendered to the duke 
of Vendome, who had taken Noailles’ command in Catalonia. On 
Sept. 20, 1697, the first treaty was signed at Ryswick between 
France, England, Spain, and Holland. Besides the concessions to 
William III, Louis withdrew from all conquests made since the 
peace of Nimwegen, and agreed that the Dutch should garrison the. 
frontier towns of the Spanish Netherlands as a security against a 


244 MODERN EUROPE. - Omar. xin. 


French invasion. The emperor still held out, and demanded the 
cession of Strasburg. William was so convinced of the importance 
of this, that he was personally willing to resume the war. But 
England and Holland were almost unanimous in their desire for 
peace, and Louis was enabled to carry his point. On October 30, 
the second treaty between Trance and the empire was concluded. 
Louis surrendered the great fortresses. of Freiburg, Breisach, and 
Philipsburg, and restored all the places acquired since the peace of 
Nimwegen except Strasburg. ‘That town with the whole of Alsace 
remained subject to France until our own day. Lorraine, with the 
sole exception of Saarlouis, was restored to its lawful duke, Leopold, 
son of Charlks 1V. Joseph Clement of Bavaria was recognised as 
elector of Cologne, and the pretensions of Fiirstenberg abandoned. 
The claims of the duchess of Orleans on the Palatinate were surren- 
dered for a sum of ready money. 

The treaty of Ryswick was a great blow to the pretensions of 
Louis XIV. He had failed to enforce the legality of his famous 
“reunions,” and had been compelled to withdraw from the Rhine 
frontier. The Stuarts, whose alliance had been of such service to 
him, remained excluded from the English throne. Holland, which 
he had wished to humiliate, was by its union with England more 
powerful than ever. ‘The French had retired from their command- 
ing position on the side of Italy. Louis had posed as the champion 
of Catholicism, but the Protestant interests had prevailed in 
Kurope. And the king had also found it advisable to yield in his 
struggle with the papacy. Directly after Innocent XI.’s death, the 
French ambassador gave up the right of franchise. Avignon, which 
the French had occupied, was restored, the French clergy humbly 
implored forgiveness for their opposition to the Holy See, and 
finally the four articles of 1682 were abrogated. But these con- 
cessions were not regarded by Louis as a final check to his ambition, 
they were only made with a definite object in view. The question 
of the Spanish succession, which had absorbed so much attention 
at the beginning of his reign, was now coming to a crisis, Louis 
wished to have his hands completely free. It is necessary to have 
a clear conception of the various claims that were involved. 


ITV. Wan or THE SPANISH SUCCESSION. 


§ 21. Charles IL., the reigning king of Spain, had never enjoyed 
sound health either in body or mind, and he was now rapidly sink- 
ing into the grave. He was the last male of the Spanish branch 
of the Hapsburgs, the descendants of Charles V. He had been 
married twice, first to Marie Louise, a niece of Louis XIV., and 


4 
Ee 
q 


A.D. 1697. THE SPANISH SUCCESSION. 245 


afterwards to Maria Anna of Neuburg, a sister-in-law of the emperor 
Leopold, but there was no prospect of his having children, and the 
succession to his throne must go to claimants by the female side. 
The eldest daughters both of Philip III. and of Philip 1V. had been 
married into the house of Bourbon, Anne to Louis XIII., and Maria 
Theresa to Louis XIV. But both had on their marriage re- 
nounced all claims to the succession. Mazarin and Louis XIV. 
had endeavoured to obtain some declaration of the invalidity of 
these renunciations, but hitherto without result. By a curious 
coincidence the younger sisters of the two French queens had been 
married into the Austrian branch of the Hapsburgs, Philip III.’s 
daughter to Ferdinand IIL, and Philip IV.’s to Leopold. ~ Neither 
of them had made any renunciation, and Philip IV.’s will had 
expressly favoured the succession of his younger in preference to 
his elder daughter. The French claims therefore being excluded 
by the renunciations of Anne of Austria and Maria Theresa, the 
hereditary right seemed to belong incontestably to the issue of 
Leopold’s marriage with Margaret Theresa. This was a daughter 
Maria, who was married to the elector of Bavaria, and who had 
already given birth to a son, Joseph Ferdinand. But Leopold was 
unwilling to allow Spain to fall altogether from Hapsburg hands. 
He had compelled his daughter to renounce her claims on Spain, 
and demanded the succession for himself as grandson of Philip LIT., 
or, as a substitute, for the archduke Charles, his younger son by a 
second marriage. ‘There were, therefore, three claimants of import- 
ance, the electoral prince of Bavaria, the archduke Charles, and either 
the son or one of the grandchildren of Louis XIV. 

The Spanish monarchy had declined immensely from its old 
importance, but it was still a prize well worth the winning. One 
king after another had been compelled to sacrifice provinces and 
strongholds either to successful rebellion or to French ambition. 
Holland and Portugal were independent. france had annexed 
Artois, Roussillon, Franche-Comté, and great part of Flanders and 
Hainault. But -besides Castile, Aragon, and Navarre, there still 
remained the bulk of the Netherlands, Milan, Naples and Sicily, 
and the great dominions in the New World. ‘The succession to so 
enormous an empire was of Wuropean importance, and Kurope was 
prepared to have a voice in the matter. ‘These were the days when 
the “balance of power” was the watchword of diplomacy, and it 
was natural that the idea of subdivision should commend itself. A 
secret treaty of partition had been concluded long ago between 
Louis and the emperor, but that was now out of date. The 
circumstances of the two princes had completely changed, and, 
moreover, William III. had arisen since then, and was prepared to 


246 MODERN EUROPE. Onap. xm. 


defend the interests of Europe. All the lesser powers were 
unwilling to allow the aggrandisement of either France or Austria 
by the acquisition of the Spanish territories. It was their obvious 
interest to support the claims of Bavaria, which were also the best 
from a legal point of view, because the renunciation of Leopold’s 
daughter, made without any reference to Spain and without Spanish 
sanction, was a purely Austrian transaction and could not be 
regarded as valid. Louis, who dreaded the natural tendency of the 
Spanish king to favour the collateral branch of his own family, and 
who was anxious to exclude Austria at all costs, thought it advis- 
able to fall in with the wishes of Europe. ‘lhe first treaty of 
partition was concluded between France, England, and Holland 
on October 11, 1698. ‘The archduke Charles was to receive the 
Milanese, the Bourbon claimant was to have Naples, Sicily, the 
Tuscan ports and Guipuscoa. All the rest of the monarchy 
was to go to the electoral prince of Bavaria, Joseph Ferdinand. 

This treaty might secure the interests of Europe, but it had one 
fatal defect, that it took no account whatever of Spanish interests 
or feelings. There both court and people were unanimous in their 
opposition to any scheme of partition whatever as likely to be 
fatal to the greatness of Spain. Charles determined, if possible, to 
avert such a misfortune, and in November made a formal will, in 
which the Bavarian prince was acknowledged as heir to all his 
dominions. But in January, 1699, the infant prince suddenly died, 
either of small-pox or of poison. Both the partition-treaty and the 
royal will were thus nullified, and the old question appeared-again 
under altered conditions. The elector of Bavaria claimed to stand in 
his son’s place by the letter of the treaty, but the claim was rejected 
both by Louis and by William III. A second treaty of partition 
was agreed upon in May, 1700, which was much more advantageous 
to Austria. The archduke Charles was to have all the Spanish 
inheritance, except the Milanese. This was to be handed over 
to the duke of Lorraine, who was in return to cede his duchy to 
France. 

- § 22. The obstinate determination of the European powers to divide 
the Spanish inheritance excited the greatest indignation in Spain. 
A strong party formed itself to maintain at all costs the unity of 
the empire. Now the only claimant who could really enforce this 
unity was Louis XIV., who was himself a party to the treaties of 
partition. But it was probable that the prospect of undivided 
succession would easily induce him to throw over his allies. It 
was certain, at any rate, that the House of Bourbon was stronger 
than the Hapsburgs, and that the accession of the latter must 
inevitably result in the weakening and dismemberment of Spain. 


A.D. 1698—1700. CHARLES IL’S. WILL 247 


‘These opinions were sedulously encouraged by Louis’ envoy, count 
Harcourt, the ablest diplomatist in the French service. The 
charm of his manner had already gained popular feeling to the side 
of France, even when the court, under the influence of the queen, 
was wholly German in its sympathies. And now the attitude of 
the court was beginning to change. ‘The queen’s power de- 
creased, and cardinal Porto-Carrero, the leader of the new French 
party, obtained supreme influence over the weak king. Charles 
sent to Rome to implore the pope’s advice, and Louis now reaped 
the benefit of his reconciliation with the papacy. Innocent XII. 
declared in favour of the French claims. ‘lhe contention was that 
the renunciation of the two infantas had been made only to prevent 
the union cf the two crowns on one head. ‘This could be avoided 
by giving Spain to Philip of Anjou, the dauphin’s second son, who 
was not the heir to the French throne. On Uct. 2, 1700, Charles II. 
made a new ivill declaring the duke of Anjou heir to the whole 
Spanish territories, on condition that he- should renounce for him- 
self and his heirs all claims to the French crown. Before another 
month had elapsed the king, who had been forced to disinherit his 
own family in favour of his old enemies, closed his unfortunate 
life. 

Everything now depended on Louis XIV.’s decision, whether he 


‘would stand fast by the treaty of partition, or whether he would 


accept the dazzling prospect offered. by Charles’ will and risk a 
European war. It is still a debated question whether the indecision 
manifested by the French court at this juncture was real or feigned. 
Some writers have maintained that Louis had all along been 
intriguing for the undivided succession, and that the treaties of 
partition, especially the second, were only intended as’a blind to 
conceal his real designs. Whatever be the truth on this point, it 
is certain that the true interests of France would have been best 
served by the peaceful acceptance of the advantages secured by the 
partition. But this would have alienated Spain, and moreover Louis 


_ had learnt to disregard all national interests in comparison with 


those of his own dynasty. The will was finally accepted, and the 
duke of Anjou was formally proclaimed as Philip V. of Spain. 

§ 23. Europe was astounded at the news of this unexpected event, 
but it was not prepared for organised opposition. It seemed at first 
as if Louis would carry through his great project unhindered. 

Maximilian of Bavaria, who had been appointed governor of the 
Netherlands by Charles II., was gained over entirely to the side of 
France. Philip V. was proclaimed in Brussels, and the barrier 
fortresses which, in accordance with the treaty of Ryswick, were 
garrisoned by Dutch troops, were now handed over to French 


248 7 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. XIII. 


garrisons. Moreover the Bavarian elector and his brother, the 
archbishop of Cologne, promised their support to France in the 
event of war against Austria. On the side of Italy, Louis was 
equally fortimate. The dukes of Savoy and Mantua were won over, 
and Philip was proclaimed without opposition both in Milan and 
Naples. The emperor was the most determined opponent whom 
the French had to fear. The establishment of French power in 
Milan was a constant and pressing source of danger to Austria. 
Moreover, the claims of the archduke Charles were not to be 
relinquished without a struggle. Fortunately the Turkish war 
had been ended by the peace of Carlowitz in 1698. In Germany, 
Leopold could rely upon the newly created elector of Hanover, and 
on Frederick of Brandenburg, whom he bribed with a promise to 
transform his electorate into a kingdom. But even with these 
allies the Austrian power was not sufficient to do more than hold 
its own in Germany and to attack Milan. There could be no 
chance of obtaining the Spanish crown without the support of the 
maritime powers. 

England and Holland had both acknowledged Philip V. as king 
of Spain. William III. protested bitterly against Louis’ breach of 
faith, but he couid do nothing against the obstinate desire for peace 
which was shown by his subjects. In England he had become very 
unpopular. The Tory majority in Parliament was not only opposed 
to the war, but made a direct attack on the king’s whole system of 
government. William went so far as to meditate abdication and a 
return to Holland. From these difficulties he was freed by the 
action of Louis himself. Shortly after Philip’s departure for Spain, 
his right to an eventual succession in France was formally recog- 
nized. This was a distinct threat to Europe, which was determined 
to prevent the union of the two crowns. The exclusion of the 
Dutch garrisons, which destroyed all barrier against French 
aggression, opened the eyes of the states to the impending danger. 
It was evident that Louis treated his son’s dominions as his own. 
Finally, the measures taken to extend French and Spanish 
commerce at the expense of England and Holland, touched the 
most vital interests of both countries. William III. was at last 


enabled to arrange the Grand Alliance at the Hague (Sept. 7, - 


1701), between the emperor and his German allies, Holland, and 
England. These powers agreed to restore the barrier in the 
Netherlands between France and Holland, to compel the cession 
of the Milanese to Austria, to protect the threatened Dutch and 
English commerce, and exclude France from the Spanish treaties. 
It is evident that the allies did not undertake to fight the succession 
quarrel on behalf of the emperor, but only to assist him as far as 


ete ho yy ere 


A.D. 1700-1702. THE GRAND ALLIANCE. 249 


coincided with their own interests, and to extort reasonable 
securities from France. A few days after the conclusion of this 
alliance James II. died at St. Germains. Under the impulse of the 
moment, and forgetful of the stipulations made at Ryswick, 
Louis acknowledged the young prince as king of England. The 
act does honour to his heart, but it was a false political move. 
Public opinion in England was profoundly stirred by the claim of a 
foreign prince to determine who should be their king. The Tory 
parliament was dissolved, and the new elections were overwhelm- 
ingly in favour of the king’s partisans. William was now freed 
from the last obstacle in the way of that great war against France 
which was the object of his life. But before he could see the fruit 
of his policy, he died, without children, on March 19, 1702. 
England and Holland were now separated. The crown of the 
former fell to William’s feeble sister-in-law, Anne. But the great 
statesman’s policy survived his death. It was ably continued in 
Holland by the grand pensionary Heinsius, and in England by the 
duke of Marlborough. ‘hese two men, with the Austrian com- 
mander, prince Eugene, were the real leaders of the alliance against 
Louis XIV. ; 

The Grand Alliance was-in no way more formidable than the 
previous leagues, which had failed to conquer France even when 
Spain was separate and hostile. But France was no longer what it 
had been. ‘The three short years of peace had been insufficient to 
restore order in the fimancial administration. The king continued 
his enormous personal expenditure, and considered that he was 
benefiting the people by squandering millions on useless Juxury. 
Louis himself was growing old; he lived more in retirement, and 
had less knowledge of men and measures. The great ministers and 
generals who had shed such lustre on his earlier years had dis- 
appeared. Villars and Vendome were able commanders, but far 
inferior to Condé, Turenne, or Luxemburg. And in civil adminis- 
tration there was no one to be compared with Colbert, or even with 
Louvois. When Pontchartrain was made chancellor, the charge of 
the finances was entrusted to Chamillart, a young man who had no 
other merit than his ignorance and docility. So easy did Louis find 
it to work with a minister inferior to himself, that in 1701, on the 
death of Barbesieux, Chamillart received the war department in 
addition. He was thus practically sole minister, and had to bear 
the burdens that had taxed to the uttermost the joint energies of 
Louvois and Colbert. The inevitable result-swas confusion and 
maladministration. In the army especially, the old discipline dis- 
appeared, venality and other disorders flourished. The troops 
were ill-paid and ill-fed: the organisation which Louvots had 


250 MODERN EUROPE. ~ CHAP. x11. 


raised to such excellence, fell to pieces. The king, with fatal self- 
confidence, assumed the task of directing from the cabinet the 
campaigns of his generals. ‘They were often compelled to send for 
instructions, and were not infrequently defeated before the courier 
returned. 

§ 24. The war broke out in Italy in 1701, before the conclusion 
of the Grand Alliance. Prince Eugene led an imperial army against 
the Milanese. The French commander was Catinat, who had gained 
such successes in the last war. But, hampered by royal orders, he 
could neither oppose Eugene’s entry into Italy, nor resist his 
further advance. He was too independent and upright to be popular 
at court, and Louis was easily induced to give a superior command 
to Villeroy, his own personal favourite, and the most fatally incom- 
petent of all the French generals. Villeroy not only gained no 
successes, but by his arrogance disgusted the duke of Savoy, and 
almost alienated him from the French alliance. Against the 
unanimous advice of his council, he determined to attack the 
imperialists at Chiari, and was repulsed with great loss (Sept. 
1701.) As he was quartered in fancied security at Cremona, the 
town was surprised by a night attack of Eugene, and Villeroy him- 
self was taken prisoner. ‘To repair these losses the command was 
given to the duke of Vendome, a great grandson of Henry IV. 
Though a glutton and a sluggard, Vendome had great military 
talents, and though his indolence often led him into difficulties, his 
ability hardly ever failed to extricate him from them. He was 
beloved by the soldiers, whose vices he made no efforts to check. 
Under him the balance of power in Italy and the reputation of the 
French arms were restored. He forced Eugene to raise the siege of 
Mantua, and won a somewhat indecisive victory at Suzzara. But 
he was unable to drive the imperialists from Italy, and could only 
protect Mantua and Milan. And his successes, such as they were, 
were more than counterbalanced by the defection, in 1703, of the 
duke of Savoy. In spite of his close relationship with the Bourbons 
—he was the father-in-law both of the duke of Burgundy and of 
Philip V.—he had embarked in the war solely from motives of self- 
interest. ‘The emperor now offered him territorial concessions, and 
a larger subsidy than France had given him. The bribe was quite 
sufficient to change the allegiance of a prince, whose “ geography 
made it impossible for him to be aman of honour.” From this time 
the French cause in Italy steadily declined. 

§ 25. There were two other important scenes of operation—-the 
Netherlands and Germany. There, as in Italy, the French had 
an excellent position to start with. The Spanish Netherlands were 
wholly in their hands, and they had two powerful allies in the 


Rte iia) 


* 


A.D. 1701-1703. OUTBREAK OF THE WAR. 251 


electors of Cologne and Bavaria. But the war was no more suc- 
cessful than that of the Milanese. Troops from Prussia and the 
Palatinate took the important fortress of Kaiserwerth (June, 1702), 
and at one blow rendered powerless the elector of Cologne. He had 
already been placed under the imperial ban, and he now retired to 
Navarre. The command of the allied forces was undertaken by 
Marlborough, who, with a diplomatic ability quite equal to that of 
William III.,;combined far superior military talents. Though at 
first he was hampered by disunion and jealousy among the allies, 
his forces were very superior to the French under the duke of 
Burgundy and Boufflers. One fortress after another fell into his 
hands, though he was unable to fight a pitched battle. In 1703 
he took Bonn, and drove the French altogether from the electorate 
of Cologne. One solitary success attended the French arms. A 
detachment of Dutch troops, under Opdam, attacked Boufflers’ line 
at Eckerne, and was repulsed with great loss. The French were 
driven from the Rhine, but they still held Brabant, Hainault and 
Flanders defended and intact. It was no slight disadvantage for 
Louis that at a moment when all his forces were required for 
external war, a revolt broke out among the Huguenots of Languedoc. 
The mountaineers of the Cevennes, who had long endured rigorous 
persecution, at last. rose in defence of their churches and pastors. 
Under the leadership of a brilliant youth named Cavalier, they 
gained considerable successes, and though ultimate defeat was in- 
evitable, they occupied for several years some of the best troops 
and generals of France. 

In Germany the command of the French army was given to 
Catinat, who left Italy to assume it. But he was not strong 


-enough for decisive action. ‘The imperialists, under the command 


of Lewis of Baden, took the fortress of Landau without any attempt 
being made to relieve it. Alsace was now open to attack, and 
would speedily have been overrun, but for a diversion effected by 
the elector of Bavaria. He declared war against Austria, and 
seized Ulm. Lewis of Baden was compelled to withdraw from 
Alsace to meet this new danger. The elector, in danger of being 
crushed between two hostile armies, urged the French to advance 
to his relief. Catinat, always cautious, refused to run the risk, but 
the task was undertaken by one of his lieutenants, Villars, an 
active and enterprising commander. He marched towards the 
Black Forest and, more by accident than anything else, defeated the 
imperialists at Friedlingen (Oct. 14, 1702). For this victory he 
was made a marshal of France, while Catinat retired from the 
command in disgrace. Early in 1703 Villars effected the desired 
junction with the elector of Bavaria, and their combined forces 


252 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. XIII. 


seemed capable of some great achievement. Villars wished to 
march upon Vienna, and the Austrian capital would probably have 
fallen. But the elector preferred an invasion of T'yrol as more 
practicable, and because the conquest of that province would sever 
Austria from Italy. The duke of Vendome was to co-operate by 
a simultaneous advance from the south. But the enterprise was 
a failure. The Tyrolese, like the Swiss, were invincible in their 
own mountains, and the elector failed to effect a junction with 
Vendome. Meanwhile, Bavaria was attacked both by Lewis of 


Baden, and by a new Austrian army under count Styrum. ‘The | 


elector returned only just in time to prevent a junction between the 
two hostile armies. With the aid of Villars he repulsed Lewis of 
Baden, and then, returning to the Danube, defeated Styrum at 
Hochstedt. And in Alsace the French recovered ground. Marshal 
Tallard, taking advantage of the absence of Lewis of Baden in 
Bavaria, besieged and took Landau. ‘Thus the campaign of 1703 
proved a brilliant success for the French. But unfortunately, 
Villars and the elector of Bavaria had quarrelled, and could no 
longer act cordially together. In deference to his ally, Louis 
recalled his ablest general, and sent him to put down the Camisards 
—as the rebels in the Cevennes were called. The command in 
Bavaria was left in the comparatively incapable hands of Marsin, 
while Tallard continued to lead the army. in Alsace. At the same 
time the French cause in Europe was immensely weakened by the 
defection of Savoy and Portugal. The latter country was bribed 
by the commercial advantages offered by England in the Methuen 
treaty. 

§ 26. The campaign of 1704 was the decisive turning-point in the 


war. The elector of Bavaria took Passau, and Vienna was exposed ° 


to immediate attack. The emperor was the centre of the Grand 
Alliance. If he could be crushed, the war might easily be ended. 
The greatest exertions were necessary to prevent such a result. 
Prince Eugene left Italy to concert measures with Marlborough. 
It was decided to leave a small force in the Netherlands, and to 
make a bold advance upon Bavaria. Easily eluding the incapable 
Villeroy, who had escaped from prison to bring renewed discredit 
on the French arms, Marlborough marched directly towards the 
Danube. The elector’s troops were posted in a strong position at 
Schellenberg, but Marlborough forced his lines, and drove him to 
retreat. A junction with Eugene was triumphantly effected. The 
other imperial commander, Lewis of Baden, jealous of Marlborough 
and Eugene, preferred to act independently. Meanwhile, Tallard 
had quitted Alsace, marched through the Black Forest, and joined 
Marsin and the elector. Their combined troops were numerically 


cst 


} 
>» 
: 
¢ 
“f 


A.D. 1703-1706. BLENHEIM AND RAMILLIES. 253 


superior to the allies, and they determined to risk a general engage- 
ment at Blenheim. There ensued one of the great battles in the 
world’s history, in which the allies, through superior generalship, 
won a complete victory. Marlborough was opposed to Tallard, 
Kugene to the Bavarians. Marsin and the elector, after an obstinate 
struggle, were able to make an orderly retreat, but Tallard’s army 
was cut to pieces. Austria, and the interests of the Grand Alliance - 
were saved. Bavaria was completely overrun by the allies, and 
Maximilian Emanuel sought refuge in France, where he met his 
equally unfortunate brother, the archbishop of Cologne. Landau 
was retaken by the margrave of Baden, while Marlborough reduced 
Trarbach, and occupied Trier. : 
§ 27. These successes on the part of the allies suggested the bold 
move of a direct invasion of France. The new emperor, Joseph I., 
who succeeded his father in May, 1705, was eager for this, and 
Marlborough was willing to undertake it. Great hopes were enter-~ 
tained of a decisive co-operation of the rebels in the Cevennes. 
But the German commander, Lewis of Baden, was opposed to the 
plan, and his tardy movements sacrificed the opportunity. Villars 
had already crushed the Camisards with relentless severity, and 
was now called upon to protect the threatened frontier. Marl- 
borough received intelligence that Villeroy, taking advantage of his 
absence, was threatening Liége. With bitter complaints against 
the dilatory Germans, he gave way before Villars, and retreated to 
resume his work in the Netherlands. Liége was relieved, and 
Villeroy diiven back to his old lines. But no attempt at fresh 
conquests was possible. The success of these defensive measures, 
in 1705, encouraged the French to new efforts for the next year. 
Louis and Chamillart strained every nerve to send reinforcements 
to the favoured Villeroy, who was authorised to take the offensive. 
Nothing could have suited Marlborough better. At the village of 
Ramillies he fell upon Villeroy, and completely defeated him 
(May 23,1706). The battle of Ramillies was as decisive for the 
Netherlands as that of Blenheim had been for Bavaria. All the 
great cities, Brussels, Ghent, and Bruges, fell into Marlborough’s 
hands. The archduke was proclaimed king of Spain, as Charles III. 
In Italy, also, decisive events took place in the same year, 1706. 
Vendome had returned in 1703 from his fruitless compaign 
in Tyrol to oppose the duke of Savoy who had gone over to 
Austria. The French attacked Piedmont and reduced most of the 
strong places. The emperor, who attached supreme importance to 
the retention of northern Italy, sent Eugene thither in 1705. But 
Vendome more than held his own in a battle near Cassano, and 
when Hugene returned to Vienna, on the news of the emperor’s 


954 MODERN EUROPE. Cuap. xItt. 


death, the Austrians were completely defeated. The French now 
laid siege to the capital of Piedment, Turin, and this pressing 
danger again called Prince Eugene across the Alps. The siege was 
entrusted to a royal favourite, La Feuillade, while Vendome under- 
took to oppose the advance of the Austrian general. But just at 
this critical juncture he was recalled to take the place of Villeroy, 
who had been disgraced at Ramillies. It is doubtful whether 
Vendome could have held his own against Eugene; it was certain 
that his succesors, the duke of Orleans and Marsin, could not. The 
Austrians attacked the French position, and carried all before them. 
Marsin was killed, and the whole army routed. Orleans, a man of 
considerable ability, wished to make a stand at Casale, but his 
defeated troops would not follow him, and fled in confusion towards 
the Alps. Not only was Turin relieved, but the French cause in 
Italy was ruined. The French troops in Mantua capitulated. <A 
small Austrian force entered Naples, and proclaimed Charles III. 
without opposition. The pope found it necessary to acknowledge 
the archduke as king of Spain. 

The Portuguese alliance had meanwhile opened the peninsula to 
the allied forces. An English fleet escorted the archduke Charles 
to Lisbon, but all attempts to invade Spain from the west proved 
futile. The English commander, Sir George Rooke, gained an 
important success by surprising Gibraltar (August 4, 1704), of 
which he took possession in the name of his sovereign, and which 
England has ever since retained. ‘The French fleet under the 
count of Toulouse, a natural son of Louis XIV., was defeated and 
forced to retreat. ‘The archduke now proceeded to Catalonia, a 
province often in revolt against its rulers, and which had lately been 
alienated by the conduct of Philip V. The command of the English 
forces was undertaken by the brilliant but eccentric earl of Peter- 
borough. Barcelona capitulated (Oct., 1705), and Charles JII. 
was acknowledged as king by the provinces of Catalonia, Aragon 
and Valencia. <A great effort was made by Philip V. in the next 
year to recover the lost provinces. Barcelona was blockaded by 
land and sea, and was on the point of surrender when it was 
relieved by the arrival of the allied fleet. Philip’s army was dis- 
persed, and he could only return to Madrid by getting round to 
Rousillon and crossing the Pyrenees. No sooner had he arrived 
there than he was forced to retreat by a double attack from 
Portugal and the west. ‘The allies entered Madrid in triumph, and 
Charles III. was proclaimed in the capital of Spain. 

Thus in one year the lrench had been driven from Italy and 
the Netherlands, and for the moment their cause seemed ruined in 
the peninsula. But the Spanish crown was saved to the Bourbons 


ee 


- 


A.D. 1706—1707. THE WAR IN SPAIN. 255 


by the provincial jealousies still existing in that country. Castile 
and Aragon, although subject to the same ruler ever since the 
marriage of Ferdinand and Isabella, had never laid aside their 
mutual hostility. The Castilians refused to accept a king who 
came to them supported by Aragonese forces. And their Catholic 
bigotry was aroused by the predominance of Protestantism among 
the allies. Charles III. was called “ the Most Catholic King by the 
grace of heretics.” An outburst of popular feeling drove the allies 
from Madrid and restored Philip V. (October, 1706’. The allied 
forces were now commanded by Ruvigny, a French refugee, and 
contained a regiment of Camisards under their old leader Cavalier. 
The men whom Louis’ bigotry had driven from his kingdom 
became everywhere the most bitter enemies of their former 
monarch. ‘he Franco-Spanish army was led by the duke of 
Berwick, a natural son of James II. and Arabella Churchill, and 
thus a nephew of Marlborough. He seems to have possessed much 
of his uncle’s military capacity, and proved one of the most eminent 
and trustworthy of I’rench generals. He drove the allies out of 
Castile into Valencia, and when Ruvigny attempted to resume the 
offensive he completely defeated him in the battle of Almanza 

~ (April, 1707). Cavalier’s regiment was cut to pieces and the allied 
army dispersed. Valencia and Aragon were compelled to submit to 
Philip. Charles II]. still held Barcelona, and thus kept his hold on 
Catalonia, but there seemed little prospect of his wresting the 
crown from his rival. 

§ 28. It was not in Spain alone that the French arms were success- 
ful in 1707. Everywhere the progress of the allies seemed checked. 
Villars, who in the preceding year had remained inactive for want 
of forces, was now strong enough to cross the Rhine and to force the 
lines of Stolhofen, which were weakened by the recent death of 
Lewis of Baden. The French advanced almost as far as the 
Danube carrying all before them. Although compelled to fall back 
across the Rhine by a superior force under the elector of Hanover, 
Villars had collected a large booty, and had given renewed courage 
to the French soldiers. And his successes also affected the campaign 
in the Netherlands. Marlborough had to send reinforcements to 
Germany, and thus weakened could effect. nothing of importance. 
Vendome was enabled to maintain his defensive position and to 
protect the provinces which still remained in French hands. Great 
excitement was aroused in this year by the appearance in Germany 
of the brilliant warrior Charles XII. of Sweden. Louis XIV. made 
great efforts to entice him to his side. But Charles was directly 
opposed to the religious policy of the French king, and a personal 
visit from Marlborough decided him to remain neutral. He quitted 


256 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. xuIt. 


Saxony to resume hostilities against Russia, which was rapidly rising 
to greatness under Peter the Great. 

§ 29. The comparative successes of 1707 were a poor compensa- 
tion for the financial exhaustion which the great war was causing in 
France. Hvery method of raising money, honest or dishonest, had been 
resorted to by Louis and his minister Chamillart. Old taxes were 
increased, and new ones imposed ; offices were created merely in 
order to sell them; the value of the coinage was arbitrarily raised. 
The kingdom seemed rapidly advancing towards bankruptcy, and 
the misery among the lower classes was appalling. Regardless of 
the murmurs, more or less distinct of his people, Louis pursued his 
way with truly royal obstinacy. His displeasure was visited on all 
who ventured an unfavourable criticism on his government. Fénelon, 
the blameless archbishop of Cambray and the tutor of the young 
duke of Burgundy, was suspected of satirical intentions in his 
Télémaque, and was exiled from the court. Vauban, touched by 
the popular miseries, published a scheme for an equitable readjust- 
ment of taxation. Louis, indignant at his presumption and 
forgetful of his past services, ordered the book to be burnt, and the 
patriotic author, unable to bear disgrace, died soon afterwards. But 
evils could not be removed by punishing those who pointed them 
out. Chamillart, worn out and despairing, petitioned for leave to 
retire. The king at first refused, but finally transferred the finances 
to Desmarets, a nephew of Colbert, and endowed with some of his 
uncle’s abilities. His appointment restored the public credit for a 
moment and enabled new supplies to be raised on loan. With 
these Louis determined on a grand effort for 1708, and actually set 
on foot five armies. Besides this, another attempt was made in 
favour of the Stuarts. A French fleet received orders to convey 
the Pretender to Scotland, where public opinion was hostile to 
England on account of the recent Union (1707). But the naval 
supremacy of England was now firmly established, and the expedi- 
tion was lucky in being able to return in safety to Dunkirk. It 
was in the Netherlands, however, that the French king decided to 
strike a decisive blow. An enormous army was raised, not without 
creat difficulty, but with almost inexplicable fatuity Louis entrusted 
the joint command to the duke of Burgundy and Vendome. No 
two men could be more utterly different in character, the former 
pious and methodical, the latter a libertine and the most irregular 
and eccentric of strategists. Their quarrels ensured the failure of 
the enterprise. But at first everything seemed favourable. The 
Catholics of the Netherlands were alienated by the rule of 
Charles II., which only nominally concealed the domination of the 
hated Dutch Calvinists. 'They welcomed the French as deliverers. 


ase % ria 


A.D. 1708-1709. OUDENARDE AND MALPLAQUET. 257 


Ghent, Bruges and other towns hastened to open their gates to 
them. Marlborough, hampered as usual by divisions among the 
allies, despaired for a moment of success, but his courage was 
restored by the arrival of Eugene, who had dexterously eluded the 
Trench under Berwick and made his way to Brussels. Burgundy 
and Vendome, disputing almost every movement, were now advanc- 
ing on Oudenarde. There the allies attacked them and gained a 
complete victory. The victors at once laid siege to Lille, a fortress 
of great strength, which was regarded as Vauban’s masterpiece and 
which was defended by Bouffiers with a large force. Eugene 
undertook the conduct of the siege, while Marlborough covered him 
from attack. he disputes between the French commanders were 
embittered by the arrival of Berwick, who, out of jcalousy of Vendome, 
supported the duke of Burgundy. Vendome wished to attack 
Marlborough, but was finally overruled, and Lille was left to its 
fate. Boufflers, after a heroic defence, was forced to surrender 
(December 8, 1708). Ghent, Bruges and the whole of Flanders 
had to submit. 

To these military disasters were added an empty treasury and 
famine. ‘The winter of 1708-9 was excessively cold in France, and 
the general misery found expression in a discontent that might 
easily become rebellion. Louis X1V., whose dynastic policy was 
the cause of these evils, was at last compelled to give way and to 
implore peace. His minister, Torcy, was despatched to the ‘ trium- 
virate ’ who directed the affairs of the allies, Eugene, Marlborough 
and Heinsius. These men were the bitter opponents of Louis XIV. 
and were determined to weaken and humiliate him as the enemy of 
Ixurope. Their chief demands were, the exclusion of the Bourbons 
from all share in the Spanish monarchy, the erection of a strong 
barrier for Holland, and the restoration to the empire of all acquisi- 
tions made since the peace of Westphalia. These demands were 
perhaps not too excessive, considering the condition of France and 
the successes of the allies. But to these they added the exasperat- 
ing condition that Louis should himself assist in expelling his 
grandson from the Spanish dominions. With a reminiscence of his 
old greatness he declared that if he must fight, it should be against 
his enemies rather than his own children, and broke off the 
negotiations. By Torcy’s advice he published a direct appeal to 
the nation, detailing all the circumstances and calling on them for 
assistance. His subjects, touched by this unparalleled condescension 
of their aged ruler, responded with enthusiasm. Another army 
was raised and entrusted to Villars, the only general who had met, 
with no great disaster. He was unable to prevent Marlborough from 
taking 'Tournay, but blocked his way to Mons. At Malplaquet the 


15 


258 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. x1mI. 


most stubbornly contested battle of the war was fought (Sept. 11, 
1709). Villars was wounded and the army retreated under Boufflers. 
Though the allies were nominally victorious, and Mons surrendered 
to them, they suffered enormous losses, far more than their opponents. 
The courage of the French was immensely raised when they learned 
that the invincible Marlborough might be faced without the 
certainty of defeat. 

§ 30. Louis was able to resume negotiations in 1710 on somewhat 
better terms. A congress met at Gertruydenburg, and the French 
offered great concessions. The acknowledgment of Charles IIL, 
the withdrawal of all assistance from Philip V., the cession of the 
barrier fortresses to the Dutch, and the restoration of all territory 
acquired since the time of Richelieu, seemed sufficient to satisfy the 
most exacting of enemies. But the triumvirate were inexorable. 
They maintained that there:could be no valid security for Philip’s 
abdication, unless the French supported the allies in compelling it. 
On this point Louis could not in honour give way, and the 
negotiations came to anend. All the time the war continued, to 
the constant disadvantage of the French. Douai, Aire, Bethune, 
and a number of other towns were taken. Villars, with an inferior 
force, could do nothing but save Arras:from attack. Louis’ acqui- 
sitions in the north, which he had hoped to form into an unassail- 
able frontier, had been conquered one after another. The allies had 
now advanced to the old borders of France, and, if they could only 
hold together, seemed likely to invade and to conquer the kingdom. 

But this was not to be. It was soon made evident that the 
allies, in pressing too hardly upon Louis, had injured their own 
cause. Public opinion, an important though incalculable force, 
sympathised with the king who so resolutely refused to turn against 
his grandson. At the very moment when affairs seemed most 
hopeless, when Louis himself had determined to induce Philip to 
make a voluntary abdication, more favourable prospects showed 
themselves. It was from Spain that the first good news came to 
France. There the war had been by no means terminated by the 
triumph of Philip V. in 1707. The archduke Charles still held out. 
in Catalonia, and in 1710, strengthened by reinforcements from 
England under Stanhope, and from Austria under Stahremberg, was 
able once more to take the offensive. The Franco-Spanish forces 
were defeated at Saragossa, and, by Stanhope’s advice, Charles once 
more occupied Madrid. But the geographical position of the 
Spanish capital makes it one of the least important towns of Spain 
from a military point of view. No advantage was gained by its 
occupation, and the people remained resolute in their attachment to 
the Bourbon king. The presence of the Protestant English roused 


A 
& 


AD. 1709-1711. FALL OF THE WHIGS. 259 


all the religious antipathies of the orthodox Castilians. Charles 
soon found it advisable to evacuate Madrid. And now Vendome 
appeared in Spain to recover the reputation he had lost at Oudenarde. 
Attacking Stanhope at Brihuega, he took prisoners the whole 
English detachment. Following up his success, he completely 
defeated Stahremberg at Villa Viciosa. This victory secured to 
Philip Y. the Spanish crown. Aragon and Valencia were reduced, 
and the archduke was once more confined to Catalonia. 

Still more favourable to the French was the ministerial revolution 
that took place at this time in England. Anne was ‘by nature 
inclined to the Tory party, to which power had been entrusted at 
the commencement of her reign. But the opposition of the Tories 
to the continental war forced Marlborough, whose influence was 
supreme with the queen, to rely more and more upon the Whigs, 
and at last a purely Whig ministry was formed under Godolphin, 
But English public opinion was gradually turning against the 
costly and apparently endless war. ‘The losses at Malplaquet made 
a profound impression. The duchess of Marlborough, so long domi- 
nant at the court, was supplanted in the queen’s favour by Mrs. 
Masham. ‘The impeachment of Sacheverel for a sermon against the 
Whig theorits alarmed Anne for the safety of the established 
church. The Whigs were turned out of office to make room for the 
Tories under Harley and St. John. The new ministers at once set 
themselves to reverse the policy of their predecessors, and opened 
secret negotiations with France. 

At this juncture a decisive event occurred. ‘The emperor, Joseph 
I., died in April 1711, without children. The heir to his territories 
was the archduke Charles, the claimant of the Spanish crown, who 
became emperor as Charles VI. To allow him to obtain the 
Spanish succession would be to revive the empire of Charies V., 
and would be even more dangerous to the balance of Europe than 
the recognition of Philip V. Thus the attitude of the allies was in 
a moment completely changed. ‘The object for which they had 
been making such immense exertions was now a result to be averted 
at any cost. 

§ 31. These events seemed to make peace inevitable, but till the 
terms could be arranged, the. war continued. Marlborough still held 
his command in the Netherlands, and was preparing for the projected 
invasion of France. He broke through the lines which Villars had 
fortified, and invested Bouchain, which surrendered. But this was 
his last success. His enemies in England at last had the courage 
to recall him, and he was deprived of all his offices. The duke of 
Ormond, who succeeded to his command, received orders to act 
strictly on the defensive. The preliminaries of peace had already 


260 MODERN EUROPE. CHap. x11. 


been arranged between Torey and St. John, now viscount 
Bolingbroke. In January, 1712, the diplomatists met in congress 
at Utrecht. The emperor was still eager to prolong the war, and 
sent Eugene to London. But the great commander met with 
nothing but insults, and was convinced that he must carry on the 
war alone. England and France agreed to a truce in May, and 
Louis ceded Dunkirk as a pledge for the honesty of his designs. In 
spite of this defection, Eugene had still a large army, with which he 
laid siege to Landrecies, as a preliminary to an invasion of France. 
But the danger was averted by a brilliant move on the part of 
Villars. He determined to break the enemy’s line of communica- 
tions by an attack on Denain, which was held by the Dutch. The 
design was as happily conducted as it was conceived. Eugene 
hurried up, just in time to witness the defeat of his allies. The 
siege of Landrecies was raised, and Villars, after reducing Douai, 
Quesnay, and Bouchain, returned in triumph to Paris. France was 
secure and a powerful impulse was given to the negotiations at 
Utrecht. 

The great object of England, which took the lead in the negotia- 
tions, was to prevent the union of the crowns of France and Spain 
on the same head. Accordingly two alternatives were offered to 
Philip V.: either the Italian provinces of Spain with the prospect 
of the succession in France, or Spain and the Indian empire with a 
renunciation of all claims to the French crown. He at once decided 
in favour of the country which had shown such devoted attach- 
ment tohim. Ina sitting of the Cortes he formally renounced all 
rights to the French succession. At the same time the two nearest 
princes of royal blood in France, the dukes of Berry and Orleans, 
made a similar renunciation of all claims upon Spain. Thus all 
obstacles in the way of peace were removed. ‘The Dutch, who were 
at first inclined to stand out, and were bitter against the defection 
of England, gave way after the battle of Denain. On the 11th of 
May, 1718, the series of treaties known as the peace of Utrecht, 
_were signed by all the belligerent powers, except the emperor. 
Philip V. was recognised as king of Spain and the Indies, on con- 
dition of the above-mentioned renunciation. England reaped the 
greatest advantages from the war of which she had borne the chief 
burden. The Protestant succession was secured, and the Stuarts ex- 
cluded from France. The cession of Gibraltar and Minorca established 
English predominance in the Mediterranean. Dunkirk was to be dis- 
mantled. Newfoundland, Acadia (Nova Scotia), and Hudson’s Bay 
were ceded by France, and a favourable commercial treaty was con- 
cluded. Spain also made great commercial concessions to England. 
The Dutch obtained the coveted barrier fortresses of the Spanish 


A.p. 1712-1714. TREATY OF UTRECHT. 261 


Netherlands, the rest of which were to go to Austria. The duke of 
Savoy received Sicily with the title of king. Prussia was recog- 
nised as a kingdom, and obtained Upper Gelderland. ° It is a lasting 
disgrace to the allies that no stipulations were made in favour of 
the Catalans, who had rendered loyal service during the war, and 
were now left to the tender mercies of the Spanish monarchy. 

§ 32. The emperor refused to accept the treaty of Utrecht, and 
continued the war against France. Louis XIV., with the help of 
Desmarets, raised the necessary funds for a last campaign. Villars 
took the command of the army, and it was soon evident that 
Austria, unsupported by the allies, was no match for France. After 
reducing Landau, Villars crossed the Rhine, and in spite of the 
efforts of Eugene, besieged and reduced Freiburg. These successes 
forced the emperor*to come to terms. The two generals undertook 
the negotiations, and the treaty of Rastadt was concluded with 
Charles VI. (March, 1714). Soon afterwards a supplementary 
treaty was arranged at Baden with the whole empire. ‘The emperor 
received as his share of the Spanish inheritance, Naples, Milan, 
Mantua and Sardinia. About the Netherlands he was tomake his own 
terms with Holland. He agreed to restore the electors of Bavaria 
and Cologne to their territories and rights. France kept Landau, 
Strasburg and Alsace, but ceded Freiburg, Breisach, Kehl and all 
other places which the French occupied on the right bank of the 
Rhine. Thus the general pacification of Europe was at last 
completed. 


V. Last Years or Lours ALE 


§ 33. While France was occupied with the great war, the internal 
agitation on religious questions continued to attract attention. 
The Huguenots were finally crushed by the reduction of the 
Cevennes, but the Jansenists still existed, and with increased 
influence. As Louis XIV. grew older, he fell more and more under 
the influence of the Jesuits, who sought to identify the Catholic 
cause with that of the monarchy. His confessor was no longer 
the mild and politic La Chaise, but Le Tellier, a peasant’s son, 
harsh and cruel, and living only in the narrow interests of his order. 
The result was that every element of opposition to the government 
was naturally inclined to Jansenism. The disasters of the war and 
the reckless financial administration raised the sect to the greatest 
importance. Noailles, the successor of Harlay in the archbishopric 
of Paris, was himself a moderate Jansenist, and took under his 
patronage a book by Quesnel, which the Jesuits accused of con- 
taining heretical doctrines. Louis, who had always aimed at 
the absolute unity of France both in religion and politics, could 


262 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. XIII. 


not tolerate the existence of a sect which divided the nation into 
two hostile camps. Moreover, he saw among the Jansenists all 
those tendencies represented which he had tried to crush; the 
constitutional longings of the old Fronde, the independence of the 
nobles, the provincial liberties, and the exclusion of state control in 
church matters. It was easy for Le Tellier to induce him to take 
vigorous measures. ‘The first step was directed against Port Royal, 
the original home of Jansenism. ‘The monastery was now occupied 
only by aged nuns, as the admission of novices had been long 
prohibited. They were called upon to sign a declaration acknow- 
ledging the heresies of their first teacher, but they preferred 
martyrdom to submission, Accordingly the aged ladies were 
forcibly dispersed and some of them imprisoned, and the monastery 
of Port Royal was rased to the ground. Not content with this, 
the Jesuits induced pope Clement XI. to issue the bull Unigenitus, 
in which he explicitly condemned Quesnel’s book which the 
archbishop of Paris had formally approved. ‘This exercise of papal 
authority produced the greatest ferment. Noailles and eight other 
bishops refused to accept it and were supported by the Parliament 
of Paris and a crowd of followers. The king was induced to support 
the bull and to regard the opposition as a revolt against the royal 
authority. A persecution followed, less important and less open 
than that of the Protestants, but quite as discreditable. The 
number of sufferers is reckoned at thirty thousand of the most 
cultured and orderly classes. They were allowed no trial, but 
were arbitrarily imprisoned by lettres de cachet. Noailles was 
allowed to escape through the favour of Madame de Maintenon, 
whose niece was married to the archbishop’s nephew. This secret 
and cowardly persecution casts a gloom over the closing years of 
Louis’ reign. 

§ 34. The general depression which overspread the court at this 
time and which contrasts so strongly with the gaiety and festivities of 
Louis’ youth, was caused in the first place by the military disasters 
and the universal misery of the people, but was deepened by losses 
in the royal family. In a country like France, where centralisation 
had been carried to extremes, and everything centred round the 
monarch, such losses had a far more general and definite importance 
than in constitutionally governed countries. And Louis had always 
laid great stress on the position and alliances of the members of his 
family. He wished to form them into a separate caste between the 
crown and the great nobles, and thus to lower the latter in the 
social scale. It was an inestimable advantage to him that his only 
brother showed none of those tendencies towards independent 
action: which had been so common with previous princes of the 


— 


ee 


A.D. 1714. LOUIS XIV’S FAMILY. 263 


blood. Philip, who became duke of Orleans on the death of his 
uncle Gaston, was always completely submissive to his elder 
brother. He supported his domestic policy, he rendered substantial 
military service as long as he was allowed to lead armies, and when 
fraternal jealousy withheld this occupation he retired contentedly 
to St. Cloud, where he imitated the superior grandeur of Versailles. 
He was married twice, first to Henrietta of England, the favourite 
of king and court, and the negotiator of the treaty of Dover, and 
afterwards to Charlotte Elizabeth of the Palatinate, whose obstinate 
adherence to the customs and principles of her fatherland made her 
a conspicuous but isolated figure at the royal court. One son, 
Philip, was born of his marriage, and on his father’s death in 1701 
he became duke of Orleans. He was a man of considerable and 
versatile talents, but he disgraced them by a libertinism which was 
without parallel even in those days. The king, who became more 
decorous than ever in his later years, regarded his nephew with the 
eravest suspicion and mistrust. 

Louis himself had only one son, the dauphin, with whose educa- 
tion the greatest pains were taken. The Delphin edition of the 
classics was drawn up for his special use, and it was for him that 
Bossuet wrote his universal history. But all these pains were 
thrown away. He grew up without any intellectual tastes, and 
plays a very subordinate part in the history of the reign. His 
father’s wishes were law to him, and he unhesitatingly adopted 
Louis’ religious and dynastic policy. He was married toa Bavarian 
princess, who lived unhappily with him, but brought him three 
sons, the dukes of Burgundy, Anjou, and Berry. The second of 
these became king of Spain as Philip V. Besides these legitimate 
descendants, Louis had a number of natural children, who also 
absorbed a great share of his attention. These, too, he was prepared 
to exalt above the heads of the great nobles. The most important 
of them were his two sons by Madame de Montespan, who were 
created duke of Maine and count of Toulouse. They had been early 
separated from their mother and entrusted to the care of Madame 
de Maintenon, who seems to have felt for them an affection which 
they reciprocated. The duke of Maine received high military 
command and the important governorship of Languedoc. The 
count of Toulouse was made admiral of the fleet. For his natural 
daughters, too, Louis secured lofty alliances, and employed them to 
bind the nobles closer to his person. One was married to the prince 
of Conti; another to a grandson of the great Condé; and a third to 
the young Philip of Orleans, much to the disgust of that prince’s 
mother, who had German notions on the subject of rank and 
birth. 


264 MODERN EUROPE. ~ Cuap) xm. 


In 1711 the dauphin, who had so long been regarded as the 
successor to the throne, and was expected to continue his father’s 
policy, died suddenly and unexpectedly of small-pox. His death 
attracted universal attention to his eldest son, the duke of Burgundy, 
who now became dauphin. His education at the hands of Fénelon 
had been far more successful than that of his father. He had 
become learned and devout, and what was more important, had 
conceived a real desire to appreciate and to remedy the grievances 
of the people. He had little sympathy for the policy and character 
of his grandfather, and held himself as much as possible aloof from 
the court. His accession to the throne would probably have altered 
many of his views, but must have proved a great era in the history of 
France. His wife, a daughter of the duke of Savoy, was in every 
respect the antithesis of her husband, but in spite of this she was 
devotedly attached to him, and would have supplied many of the 
deficiences of his character. Light-hearted and anxious to please, 
she delighted in the court festivities, and the charm of her 
out-spoken gaiety completely won over the king and even Madame 
de Maintenon. The grief of the court was intense when the 
dauphine was seized with fever in February, 1712, and died after 
a few days’ illness. Dut the grief became consternation when the 
dauphin, scarcely a week afterwards, fell a victim to the same 
disease. ‘The hopes and expectations of every disinterested patriot 
had been based on his accession, and they were suddenly dashed 
to the ground. ‘Two sons had been born to the dauphin, but the 
elder followed his parents to the grave, and the younger, an infant 
two years old, was only saved by the most careful nursing. These 
deaths following so closely after each other, were a terrible blow to 
the old king. The family on which he had based such hopes seemed 
suddenly annihilated. The one great-grandchild was a_ sickly 
infant whom no one expected to survive. The second grandson 
was the king of Spain, who was excluded from all prospect of 
succession. ‘Ihere remained of the king’s direct descendants only 
the duke of Berry, who possessed neither virtue nor ability, but who 
seemed destined to rule France either as regent or as king. But 
in 1714 this prince also died in the same sudden manner and with 
the same symptoms as his relatives. 

§ 35. This fourth death suddenly gave the position of first prince 
of the blood to the king’s nephew, Philip of Orleans, and in the 
-natural course of things he would become regent on Louis’ death. 
But popular rumour persistently accused him of having poisoned all 
who stood between him and this position. There were suspicious 
circumstances attending the deaths of the princes, and Orleans’ 
character was such that no crime was considered impossible. 


er 
a " 


A.D. 1711-1715. DEATH OF LOUIS XIV. 265 


Louis XIV. probably did not share the prevalent suspicion, but he 
had always disliked his nephew, and could not endure the idea of 
leaving the government in his hands. ‘To avoid this he determined 
to strain his royal authority to the utmost. In July, 1714, he issued 
an edict by which he conferred on his two natural sons, Maine and 
‘Toulouse, the rank of princes of the blood royal, and declared them 
heirs to the throne in case of the failure of the legitimate line. 
This attempt to treat the crown as a private property, and the 
violation of the laws of morality and religion, provoked the greatest 
discontent, especially among the nobles, who felt themselves most 
directly injured and insulted. Regardless of this prevalent senti- 
ment, the king made a last will, nominating the duke of Maine 
guardian of the infant heir to the throne, and appointing a council 
of Regency, of which the duke of Orleans was to be only president. 
Thus he hoped to secure the continuance of his policy. Orleans 
would be excluded from personal influence over the young king, and 
was to be powerless in the council against the duke of Maine and 
the Jesuits. This attempt to prolong his arbitrary will, even after 
his death, was the last important act of the “grand monarque.” 
He had the mortification of seeing the House of Hanover established 
in England by George I.’s accession, to the perpetual exclusion 
of his protégés the Stuarts. On Sept. 1, 1715, Louis XIV.’s 
long and eventful reign came to an end, and his infant great- 
grandson became king, as Louis XV. Madame de Maintenon, who 
had long wearied of her husband and the gilded slavery in which 
she lived with him, retired at once to St. Cyr, where she had 
established a school for the daughters of noble families. There she 
spent the rest of her life in absolute retirement, and died in 1719. 
Louis XIV. succeeded to a strong centralised monarchy, which 
had been established by Richelieu, and saved by Mazarin. In his 
domestic government he followed the lines which they had laid 
down, with the important difference that the king himself took the 
place formerly held by the minister. All institutions which claimed 
to check or control the government were weakened or destroyed. 
The States-General fell into oblivion, and the Parliament was 
reduced to submission. The religious unity, which to other rulers 
had appeared desirable but dangerous, was effected by the repression 
of Huguenots and Jansenists, though at the expense of much that 
was best and most wholesome in the life of France. The nobles 
were excluded from the political influence which had once seemed 
to be their inalienable right. At the same time their allegiance to 
the crown was secured by exemptions and social privileges, which 
raised them above the other classes, but, by arousing jealousy and 
hatred, A a ultimate cause of their downfall. Members of 
13 


266 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. xIII. 


the middle class were raised to official power, and even to rank, but 
the class from which they sprang reaped no benefit from their 
elevation. The reckless expenditure in royal magnificence and 
aggressive wars destroyed the commercial prosperity which the 
monarchy had once attempted to foster. ‘The work of Colbert 
perished almost before it was accomplished. The misery which the 
king caused and disregarded, gave an origin and a justification to 
theories of opposition, which were destined to ripen into revolution. 

In his foreign policy Louis was marvellously successful as long as 
he was content to follow the footsteps of Richelieu and Mazarin. 
France, by successive acquisitions, acquired a frontier which was 
almost impregnable, and which was never wholly overstepped, even 
in the subsequent period of military failure. But Louis’ successes 
made him regardless of the necessary limits of his power. Forget- 
ting the means by which France had risen to such greatness, he 
first alienated his Protestant allies, and then, under these altered 
conditions, recommenced his old quarrel with his Catholic neighbours. 
In the struggle that ensued, France displayed an abundance and 
readiness of resource that dismayed and astounded Europe. But 
these extraordinary exertions were too exhausting to last, and the 
result was a defeat which narrowly escaped becoming a conquest. 
It would have been well for Louis’ reputation if he could have died 
before the revocation of the edict of Nantes, or at latest just after 
the treaty of Ryswick. By the disastrous policy of the succession 
war, a war due only to his dynastic ambition, he forfeited all claims 
to the gratitude of France, while he earned the reprobation of 
Europe. 


anes tries we A ci ap eo 


CHAPTER XIV. 


PETER THE GREAT AND CHARLES XII. 


§ 1. Decline of Sweden and rise of Russia. § 2. Peter the Great; char- 
acter and policy; his travels; domestic reforms. § 3. Hostility to 
Sweden ; triple alliance between Russia, Poland, and Denmark. § 4. 
Charles XII. of Sweden; attack on Denmark; treaty of Travendahl. 
§ 5. Defeat of the Russians at Narwa; conquest of Livonia and 
Courland; Charles decides to attack Poland. § 6. Condition of 
Poland ; Swedish success in 1702-3; Augustus renews the alliance 
with Russia; election of Stanislaus Leczinski; reduction of Lithuania. 
§ 7. Charles XII. in Saxony ; Augustus compelled to resign the Polish 
crown; camp at Altranstadt. § 8. Charles XII. marches towards 
Moscow ; his defeat at Pultawa. §9. Revival of the triple alliance 
against Sweden. § 10. Charles XI. at Bender; alliance with the 
Porte; critical position of the Czar; treaty of the Pruth; Charles 
quits Turkey. §11. Events in the North during Charles’ absence ; 
ministry of Gérz. § 12. Sweden allied with Russia and with Spain ; 
chimerical schemes; death of Charles XII. § 13, Accession of Ulrica 
Eleanor; establishment of an oligarchy in Sweden; execution of 
Girz; treaties of peace. § 14. Government of Peter the Great; 
family policy; death of the Czar. § 15. Reigns of Catharine I. and 
Peter Il. ; accession of Anne of Courland. 


§ 1. In the 17th century Sweden, thanks to a succession of able 
sovereigns, and to the military ardour of its inhabitants, had 
attained to a position in Europe wholly disproportionate to its 
resources. ‘This position could in the nature of things be only tem- 
porary, and the decline of Sweden would have been as unimportant 
as it was inevitable, but that it was accompanied by the rise of 
another power of vastly superior strength and extent, which for good 
or evil has exercised the greatest influence on European history. 
Russia had emerged from the Tartar yoke, and under Iwan the 
Terrible had obtained immense extensions of territory in the east 
and south. But as yet it was hardly a European power. Its 
religion was Greek; its civilisation, so far as it had any, was 
Asiatic. Its only port, Archangel, was closed for more than half 
the year by ice, and was at all times difficult of access. To enable 
Russia to enter into the European state-system, and to obtain even 


268 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP, xIv. 


a superficial amount of western civilisation, further increase of 
territory was necessary, and a connection must be established with 
the Black Sea and the Baltic. ‘The dispersion of the territories of 
the Order of the Sword had offered an opportunity for acquisitions 
on the Baltic, but the attempt had failed. Sweden and Poland had 
shared the coveted lands, and Russia remained excluded from free 
contact with the west. ‘To reverse this condition of things was the 
grand design of Peter I., and its accomplishment rightly earned 
for him the title of “the Great.” 

§ 2. Peter had been recognised as Czar in 1682, on the death of 
Feodor, his half-brother Iwan being passed over as incapable, and his 
half-sister Sophia as a woman. But Sophia was too ambitious to 
remain content with the life of seclusion to which Asiatic ideas con- 
demned her. With the help of the Streltst, the guards who had been 
instituted by Iwan the Terrible, she organized a revolution, which 
ended in the acknowledgment of Iwan and Peter as joint Czars, and 
of herself as real ruler of the empire. This arrangement lasted only 
till 1689, when Peter, conscious of his ability to rule, drove his 
sister into a cloister, and assumed the supreme control of the 
government. It is difficult for the modern student to realise the 
character of this extraordinary man. Personally he was a savage, 
cruel, lustful, regardless of human life, stained with the grossest 
crimes, yet at the same time, undoubtedly the ablest and the 
most successful ruler of his time. It is as if a criminal of the 
lower classes were called upon to govern, and were found to be 
endowed with the highest qualities of constructive statesmanship. 
From the first Peter realized clearly the objects before him, and 
never for a moment relaxed in his pursuit of them. Russia must 
extend her frontiers to the south and west. European usages must 
supplant the old-established customs which had come from Asia. 
Above all, the military system must be reorganised so as to enable 
Russia to compete successfully with the western powers. Every- 
thing in church and state must be removed which could restrict the 
absolute authority of the Czar. There were great obstacles in the 
way. The Russians were madly jealous of foreigners, and were 
devotedly attached to the usages and institutions of their ancestors, 
But these obstacles were trampled under foot by the reckless 
energy of the Czar. It is quite possible to doubt the wisdom of 
Peter’s reforms, to say that a superficial civilisation was forced upon 
a people unprepared and unfitted to receive or appreciate it. But 
there can be no question of the enormous influence which was 
exercised by the genius of a single man. Russia has had to follow, 
more or less unwillingly, in the lines laid down for her by Peter the 
Great. 


A.D. 1682—1721. PETER THE GREAT. 269 


Peter’s first act, after he began to reign, was his intervention in 
the Turkish war, by which he obtained possessién of Azof, and thus 
opened a connexion with the Black Sea. In 1697 he started on the 
first of his famous journeys. Passing through Prussia and Hanover, 
he spent most of his time in Holland and England. There he 
studied, not as a visitor, but as a workman, the arts and employ- 
ments of an industrial community. More than 700 skilled artisans 
were induced by him to emigrate to Russia. On his return journey 
he visited Vienna, and was preparing to go to Venice, when he was 
recalled by the news of disturbances at home. His absence had been 
taken advantage of by the opponents of reform to attempt a revolu- 
tion. It was proposed to expel all foreigners, to replace Peter by 
his infant son Alexis, and to give the regency to Sophia during the 
latter’s minority. The priests were at the bottom of the scheme, 
and the Streltsi were to be employed to carry it out. But these 
forces were no match for the small body of regular troops which 
Peter had already formed under a Scotchman, Gordon. The move- 
ment was practically suppressed before Peter arrived to take 
vengeance. The ringleaders were barbarously punished, and Peter 
himself is said to have wielded the executioner’s axe. Sophia was 
confined in a narrow cell, at the window of which three of the 
rebels were hanged, with a petition to her in their hands. 

The suppression of the revolt gave Peter the opportunity to 
introduce some of hisreforms. The Streltsi were disbanded and their 
place taken by an army formed on the European model, and 
consisting of eighteen regiments of infantry (2000 men in each) and 
two regiments of dragoons. Russian customs, and especially the 
practice of wearing a beard, were interdicted at court and among 
the nobles. Women were released from the oriental seclusion in 
which they had hitherto been kept, and the Czar invited both sexes 
to his entertainments. Nobles were compelled to educate them- 
selves and to travel, under penalty of forfeiting their rank. 
Nobility was made to depend upon service rather than upon birth. 
Peter actually sent his own wife into a cloister on account of her 
conservative prejudices. Perhaps his most important reform was 
that of the church. Hitherto the Patriarch had occupied a position 
hardly inferior to that of the temporal sovereign. In 1700 the office 
became vacant, and Peter, instead of appointing a new Patriarch, 
had the duties performed by an administrator. This was only the 
prelude to further change. In 1721 he erected the “ Holy Synod ” 
which was to rule the church in complete subordination to the 
court. ‘lhe Czar now became as supreme in ecclesiastical as in 
temporal affairs. 

§ 3. Peter the Great was now able to turn his attention to what 


270 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. xiv. 


has proved the most permanently important of his successes, the 
acquisition of an opening to the Baltic. That sea was practically 
a Swedish lake. Finland, Carelia, Ingria, Esthonia, Livonia and 
the greater part of Pomerania, all belonged toSweden. Russia could 
only gain its desired object by the dismemberment of this Scandi- 
navian empire. And there were other powers interested in bringing 
this about. Poland, Brandenburg, and Denmark had all suffered 
considerable losses to aggrandize Sweden, and were ready to seize 
any opportunity that offered of recovering their former territory. The 
arbitrary government of Charles XI. (1660-1697) had alienated the 
subject populations of his monarchy. Their resentment found a 
vigorous representative in John Reinhold Patkul, a Livonian noble, 
who had represented the grievances of his country to Charles XI. in 
1690, and had been condemned to death for his patriotic freedom of 
speech. Escaping from prison he became the soul of the general 
hostility to Sweden, and was determined, with foreign assistance, to 
free Livonia from the hated oppressor. He first applied to Branden- 
burg, where a little earlier he might have found a ready hearer in 
the Great Elector, but he failed to make any impression on his 
sluggish son. Ultimately he turned to Augustus, elector of Saxony 
and since 1687 king of Poland. Poland had a hereditary quarrel to 
fight out with Sweden, and the loss of Livonia and Esthonia was too 
recent to be forgotten. But Augustus was not influenced so much by 
Polish interests, as by a desire to make his power in his kingdom 
as absolute as it was in his electorate. ‘The Poles were determined 
to restrict in every way the authority of the king whom they had 
chosen, and were resolutely hostile to the employment of Saxon 
troops within their borders. ‘This opposition could only be over- 
come by the outbreak of war, and hence arose the willingness of 
Augustus and his minister lemming to embark in a contest with 
Sweden. In November, 1699, Patkul was able to negotiate a 
treaty between Augustus and Peter, by which the latter was to 
obtain Ingria and Carelia, while Poland occupied Livonia and 
Ksthonia. 

A third member of the alliance against Sweden was found in 
Frederick IV. of Denmark. he house of Oldenburg on their 
accession in 1449 had united to the Danish crown the duchies of 
Schleswig and Holstein. But Christian IIT. (1534-1558) out of 
affection for his brother Odolf had arranged a curiously intricate 
joint rule over these duchies. ‘This arrangement proved the source 
of endless quarrels between the Danish kings and their relatives 
of the line of Holstein-Gottorp, the cescendants of Odolf. The 
former were always endeavouring to annex the duchies to their 
monarchy, while the dukes wished to make themselves independent. 


A.v. 1697-1700. CHARLES XII. OF SWEDEN. 271 


Every time that a king of Denmark had almost succeeded in 
attaining his object, he was foiled by the intervention of the neigh- 
bouring powers. Finally, in 1689, the independence of Holstein 
had been guaranteed by England, Holland and Sweden, in the treaty 
of Altona. This arrangement Frederick 1V. was determined to 
overthrow. But the duke of Holstein, another Frederick 1V., had 
married the sister of Charles XIJ., who was devotedly attached 
to his brother-in-law. The Danish king could only effect his object 
in defiance of Sweden. ‘Therefore he readily undertook to invade 
Schleswig and Holstein, while the Poles and Prussians overran the 
Swedish provinces in the east of the Baltic. 

It is interesting to compare this triple league of the north with 
the Grand Alliance which was arranged at the Hague almost at the 
same time. In the latter there was at least one common motive, 
hostility to France. But the northern powers were in pursuit of 
entirely personal and selfish objects, and sought only to use each 
other for their own ends. Augustus committed himself to the war 
without obtaining or even seeking the approval of the Poles. ‘The 
king of Denmark cared nothing about the eastern Baltic if only he 
could acquire the coveted duchies. Peter the Great would not 
move a finger to put Poland in possession of Esthonia and Livonia, 
and thought only of making himself master of the mouth of the 
Neva. 

§ 4. The allies based their hopes of success, not so much on their 
united co-operation, as on the supposed weakness of Sweden. In 
1697 Charles XII., then fifteen years of age, had succeeded his 
father Charles XJ. As there were three years to elapse before he 
attained his majority, the regency was entrusted to his mother. 
But Charles, with the help of Count Piper, who became henceforth 
his chief adviser, got this arrangement altered, and took the reins ot 
government into his own hands. Hitherto he had been occupied 
only with hunting and similar amusements; and his youth and 
inexperience flattered his opponents with the prospect of an 
easy victory. But Charles was a born soldier, conspicuous even 
among a race of military rulers. In 1700, the news reached him 
that the Danes had entered Schleswig, that Augustus II. had laid 
siege to Riga, and that the Russians had advanced to Narwa. From 
that moment the young king gave up every other occupation and 
devoted himself heart and soul to the trade of war. On the 8th ot 
May he quitted Stockholm, which he never ‘saw again. While 
Il’rederick IV. was in Holstein, the Swedish fleet sailed directly to 
the coast of Zealand. It was a great advantage to Charles that 
the maritime states, anxious to prevent the outbreak of war in the 
north, had sent a fleet into the Baltic to compel the observance of © 


272 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP, XIV. 


the treaty of Altona. The Danes were unable to oppose the 
landing of the Swedes, and Copenhagen was defenceless. Denmark 
must have fallen into the hands of the invaders but for the media- 
tion of England and Holland. Frederick 1V. was fortunate to escape 
with nothing worse than the peace of 'Travendahl (August 20, 
1700), by which he restored the independence of the duke of 
Holstein-Gottorp, and withdrew from all hostile alliances against 
Sweden. 

§ 5. The other allies were not more fortunate. Riga was ably 
defendea by Dalberg, and Augustus had to withdraw his troops with- 
out having effected anything. Charles XII. was now able to meet 
the most formidable of his opponents, Russia. With little more 
than 8000 men he attacked an army of 63,500 before Narwa. Peter 
withdrew before the conflict, either through the cowardice of 
inexperience or, as he asserted, to seek reinforcements. ‘The 
Russian troops were ill-trained and suspicious of the foreign officers 
who commanded them. ‘The engagement was rather a panic than 
a battle. The Swedes took more prisoners than their own numbers, 
and regard for their own safety compelled them to dismiss all the 
common soldiers. ‘lhe victory was a great and decisive one, but 
its results were more fatal to Sweden than to Russia. Charles XII. 
was intoxicated with success, deemed himself invincible, and des- 
pised his enemy as cowardly and incapable. Peter, on the other 
hand, had gained experience and had lost only an army, no great 
matter to the despot of Russia. Report attributes to him the 
prophetic saying that ‘‘ the Swedes will often beat us, but in the 
end they will teach us to beat them.” | 

Charles XII. followed up his success at Narwa by entering Livonia. 
Routing the Saxon troops on the Diina, he reduced the whole 
province and also the duchy of Courland to obedience. In July, 
1701, the Swedish king had defeated all his enemies and might 
have concluded the war. But he had not yet had his fill of glory 
and was determined to win fresh laurels. The question now arose 
as to which of the two hostile powers, Russia or Poland, he should 
attack. All his wisest and most experienced advisers urged that 
Augustus. was really powerless, that the power and even the 
existence of Sweden were involved in the depression of Russia. The 
destinies of Europe depended on Charles’ decision. He allowed 
himself to be guided by revenge rather than by policy, and 
determined to make his first object the deposition of Augustus 
from the Polish throne. Early in 1702, he invaded Poland and 
occupied Warsaw. 

§ 6. Affairs in Poland were in a condition which would have been 
impossible in any other state. The king was at war, but the 


A.D. 1700-1704. CHARLES XII. IN POLAND 273 


republic was not. Augustus had disregarded the constitutional 
obligation of consulting the diet, and this was in itself enough to 
disgust the nobles with the enterprise. They also feared the king’s 
design to make himself absolute with the help of Saxon troops. 
The diet, therefore, refused all assistance; the treaty with Russia 
remained unconfirmed ; Augustus was called upon to withdraw his 
own army and was not allowed to levy that of Poland. It was one 
of the great defects of the elective monarchy, that the king, chosen 
by a faction, remained always the head of a faction. The powerful 
Lithuanian family of Sapieha had already assumed an attitude of 
open hostility to the king in opposition to the Oginsky, who 
supported him. And many of Augustus’ own partisans had been 
alienated by his rule or were absorbed in the pursuit of selfish 
objects. Prominent among them was the Cardinal-Primate, 
Radziejowski, the arch-intriguer of this period, who wished to give 
the crown to a creature of his own, so as to make himself the real 
ruler of Poland. 

The opposition to Augustus did not at first take the form of an 
alliance with Charles XII. The early embassies of the diet called 
upon him to quit the territory of a state which had given him no 
cause of quarrel. But the continued successes of the Swedish king 
speedily induced the malcontents to rally to his standard. In June, 
1702, he routed the Saxon forces at Clissow, and followed this up 
by the reduction of Krakau. His presence alone seemed to ensure 
success. In the next year he took Lublin and Pultusk, and the West- 
Prussian towns of Thorn, EKlbing and Danzig. He made no secret 
of his stern determination to compel the deposition of Augustus, 
cost him what time and toil it might. 

It wasin vain that Augustus applied for assistance to the powers 
of central Europe: no one was willing to take a step which might 
throw the Swedish conqueror on to the side of Louis XIV. Nothing 
remained but to renew the ailiance with Russia, which had hitherto 
been of little assistance. This was negotiated by Patkul, who had 
now entered the service of Peter the Great, as a more useful instru- 
ment to avenge his own wrongs and those of Livonia. The Saxon 
army was reinforced by Russian troops and by the Polish partisans 
of Augustus. But it was too late to arrest the progress of events. 
In February, 1704, an assembly at Warsaw, under the presidency of 
the Cardinal-Primate, declared that Augustus had forfeited the 
crown, which was therefore vacant. The choice of a successor would 
have fallen upon James Sobieski, the son of the defender of Vienna, 
but for a dexterous move on the part of Augustus. A small body 
of Saxons captured James Sobieski and one of his brothers, and 
carried them prisoners to Leipzig. Charles XII. was urged to assume 


274. MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. XIV. 


the crown himself, but he insisted on the election of Stanislaus 
Leczinski, woivode of Posen. The choice was not a fortunate one. 
Leczinski was personally able and disinterested, but he had no 
considerable following, and his elevation disgusted those who 
deemed themselves his equals. Radziejowski, who saw himself 
baulked of the results of his ambition, was especially alienated. 
But there was no opposing the resolute will of Charles. On the 
12th of July, 1704, amidst ill-concealed discontent, Leczinski was 
formally elected king of Poland. It was obvious from the first 
that he could only wear his crown as long as he was supported by 
a Swedish army. 

The election of a rival under foreign dictation gave a momentary 
impulse to the cause of Augustus. While Charles was employed 
in reducing Lemberg, Augustus made a sudden attack upon Warsaw, 
captured the Swedish garrison, and Stanislaus had to escape in haste 
to the camp of his protector. Charles hastened back to repair the 
loss, recovered Warsaw without difficulty, and defeated the Saxons 
at Wehlau. After witnessing the formal coronation of Stanislaus 
in the Polish capital, the Swedish army was led into Lithuania, 
which had been invaded by the Russians in accordance with the 
terms of the agreement with Augustus. In spite of the difficulties 
caused by the marshy nature of the country, Charles continued his 
successes and forced the invaders to retire. Elsewhere the Swedes 
were equally fortunate. Levenhaupt entered Courland from Riga, 
and defeated the Russian general Cheremitief (July, 1705). In 
the next year another Swedish commander, Rhenschild, won a great 
victory at Frauenstadt (l*ebruary, 1706), over a vastly superior 
army of Saxons, Poles, and Russians under the command of count 
Schulenburg. 

§ 7. Charles XI. had completed the reduction of Lithuania, but it 
was a necessary result of his position that his successes lasted only 
so long as he was present in person. No sooner had he marched 
into the southern province of Vollhynia than Augustus was able to 
recover much of the lost ground in Lithuania. | Charles now deter- 
mined to reduce his enemy to submission by an invasion of Saxony. 
Uniting the army of Rhenschild with his own, and leaving only a 
small detachment under Mardefeld in Poland, he passed the frontier 
of Germany without any permission from the Emperor, crossed the 
Oder at Steinau, and marching straight into Saxony, where no 
preparations had been made to resist him, he took up his quarters 
at Altranstadt, near Leipzig. ‘The invaded country was compelled 
to suffer for the errors of its rulers, and to pay contributions for the 
support of the Swedish army. Augustus was now in a dilemma. 
Freed from the presence of his dreaded foe, and secure of assistance 


A.D: 1704-1707. ALTRANSTADT. 275 


from Russia, he could easily recover the crown of Poland. But 
then he was not prepared to sacrifice his hereditary electorate for 
the sake of his foreign kingdom. In this difficulty he resorted to 
dissimulation. While professing his adherence to the Russian 
alliance, he sent two envoys, Imhof and Pfingsten, with purposely 
vague powers, to negotiate with Charles. The envoys tried to buy 
off the Swedish king by proposing a partition of Poland, a favourite 
design of Augustus. But Charles would have nothing but revenge, 
and adhered to his original ultimatum, the abdication of Augustus. 
Against his iron will, arguments of friend and foe were alike useless, 
and on the 25th of September the envoys agreed to a treaty, by 
which Augustus renounced the Polish crown in favour of Leczinski ; 
but kept the royal title, withdrew from all alliances against Sweden, 
especially that with the Czar, and promised to release James 
Sobieski and his brother. The treaty was now sent to Augustus 
for ratification. His position was more difficult than ever. He 
had been joined by the Russian general Menschikoff, who was 
urging him to attack the inferior force of Swedes under Mardefeld. 
Augustus dared neither refuse nor consent. He ratified the 
treaty of Altranstadt and sent secret warning to the Swedish 
general. But Mardefeld treated this as a ruse and risked a battle, 
in which he was completely defeated (29th October). Augustus 
tried hard to excuse his conduct to Charles XII. who contempt- 
uously replied by publishing the treaty to the world. This forced 
the hand of the elector, who escaped as best he could from the 
Russian allies whom he had deceived, and appeared in December at 
Dresden. Charles had an interview with his defeated rival, forced 
him to write a letter of congratulation to Leczinski, and induced 
him to surrender Patkul, who had been sent as envoy by the Czar 
to the Saxon court. In defiance of the law of nations and of the 
dictates of humanity, Charles had the unfortunate noble broken on 
the wheel as a rebel against his lawful sovereign. Augustus had to 
pay another penalty for his shifty intrigues. The Swedish army 
remained for a year longer on Saxon soil, living at the expense of a 
country which was too weak to require conquest, and which, in 
spite of the strictness of Swedish discipline, had to suffer the usual 
hardships of a foreign occupation. 

At this period the eyes of all Europe were fixed on the camp of 
Altranstadt. In 1707, Villars had broken through the lines or 
Stolhofen, and penetrated far into Swabia. If his army were to 
be joined to that of the Swedish hero, Germany would be at their 
mercy. Louis XIV. spared no pains to induce Charles XII. to 
play the part of Gustavus Adolphus to his Richelieu. The Grand 
Alliance was alarmed at the magnitude of the danger. The emperor 


276 MODERN EUROPE. CHap. xtv. 


Joseph I. sent his ablest diplomatist, Wratislaw, to Altranstadt, 
and even condescended to make concessions to his Protestant 
subjects in Silesia at the dictation of a foreign monarch. Marl- 
borough also appeared in the Swedish camp. It is difficult to 
ascertain whether the English general had any success in his 
mission. It was rumoured that he bribed Piper and other ministers 
of Charles. It is certain that he satisfied himself that the danger 
was less than it appeared. Charles was at this time a sincere 
Protestant, and had no more sympathy with the dynastic designs 
than with the religion of Louis XIV. And there was another 
enemy with whom he had to cope, and whom he had too long 
neglected, the Czar of Russia. 

§ 8. At Altranstadt, Charles XII. was at the zenith of his great- 
ness. At the age of twenty-five he had an apparently invincible 
army at his back, and seemed able to dictate to Europe. But his fall 
was more rapid than his rise had been. Ever since the battle of 
Narwa, he had pursued a radically unsound policy. His campaigns 
in Poland and Saxony had not only given Peter time to recover from 
defeat, but had indirectly furthered his cause. The only result of 
the humiliation of Augustus was to give Russia a larger share of 
the Swedish territories than had originally been dreamt of. Not 
only had Peter reduced Ingria and Carelia, and laid the foundations 
of his new capital on the swampy banks of the Neva, but his troops 
had also overrun Livonia and Courland. It was now to be seen 
whether the Swedish king could recover the losses for which his 
own conduct was chiefly to blame. It is probable that if Charles 
had marched directly to the eastern coasts of the Baltic, he would 
have carried all before him. But he determined to pursue the 
same tactics that had been so successful against IFrederick IV. and 
Augustus, and to checkmate his adversary by a direct attack on his 
capital. He was destined to find that Russia was a very different 
country from Denmark, Poland or Saxony. At the end of 1707, 
he collected all his forces, amounting to 33,000 of the finest troops 
in the world. Early in 1708 he started to march directly to Moscow. 
Levenhaupt had orders to follow him with 18,000 men. By 
September, Charles was still 800 miles from the Russian capital. 
Peter had adopted the wise tactics of watching and molesting the 
enemy without risking a pitched battle. The Swedes might still 
have been saved if Charles had been willing to wait for the 
arrival of Levenhaupt with supplies and reinforcements. But he 
was led away by an agreement which he had made with Mazeppa, 
a hetman of the Cossacks, who hoped with Swedish aid to free 
himself from Russian sovereignty and to found an independent 
Cossack empire. To join him Charles turned from the direct road 


A.D. 1707-1709. BATTLE OF PULTAWA. QUT 


and marched southwards into the Ukraine. He discovered that 
Mazeppa was unable to fulfil his grandiloquent promises, and could 
only bring 5000 Cossacks to his aid. The Swedish troops, hardy 
as they were, suffered terribly from a winter of unparalleled severity. 
Peter took prompt advantage of his adversary’s error. Falling upon 
Levenhaupt with immensely superior forces he cut his army to 
pieces, and destroyed his convoy. Levenhaupt displayed the 
most conspicuous courage and generalship, but he could only bring 
the shattered remnant of his army to join his master. From this 
time the ruin of the Swedes was only a matter of time. As 
soon as spring had put an end to the worst sufferings, Charles laid 
siege to Pultawa, an enterprise which want of artillery rendered 
hopeless from the first. everything was now prepared for the final 
blow. In June, 1709, Peter arrived with 60,000 men to crush the 
worn-out Swedes, who only numbered 29,000. To make matters 
worse Charles had received a bullet-wound in the foot, which com- 
pelled him to exchange his horse for a litter and to entrust the chief 
command to Rhenschild. On the 27th of June the great battle was 
fought which decided a momentous question for Europe, and 
transferred to Russia the position which Gustavus Adolphus and 
his successors had won for Sweden. Rhenschild, Piper, and more 
than 20,000 officers and: men were taken prisoners and dispersed 
through Russia, never to see their native country again. Charles, 
with a few companions, fled southwards, and just succeeded in 
escaping into Turkish territory. There he was hospitably received, 
and suddenly disappeared from the view of Europe in his famous 
retirement at Bender. 

§ 9. The northern states took no heed of the great change which 
Pultawa made in the balance of power. Instead of recognising the 
fact that Russia had now become their most formidable rival, they 
thought only of the fall of their ancient enemy, and how they could 
profit by the spoils of Sweden. ‘The triple alliance between Russia, 
Poland, and Denmark, which Charles XII. had so triumphantly 
crushed, sprang into life again on his defeat. Peter was naturally 
able to secure the lion’s share of the booty. He completed his 
conquest of Livonia and Esthonia, and captured Riga, Diinamunde, 
Revel, and other important towns. His hold on the Baltic was now 
secure, and he could continue the building of St. Petersburg with- 
out fear of attack. Augustus was not slow to find a pretext for 
breaking the treaty of Altranstadt. The Pope absolved him from 
his obligations, and the negotiators, Pfingsten and Imhof, were con- 
demned to severe punishments on a trumped-up charge of having 
exceeded their powers. ‘The crown of Poland was recovered as 
easily as it had been lost, and Leczinski, who was powerless with- 


278 MODERN EUROPE. Cuap. xtv. 


out Swedish aid, was driven into Pomerania, whence he made his 
way to join his unfortunate patron at Bender. Frederick IV. had no 
scruples about throwing up the treaty at Travendahl. Ever since 
its conclusion he had been occupied in improving his military forces. 
Not only did he resume his designs against the duchy of Holstein, 
he also sent an army across the Sound to attack the southern part 
of Sweden. But the Swedes, though exhausted by the long war, 
and demoralised by the loss of their army and the absence of their 
king, were still able to resist invasion. The Danes were utterly 
routed under the walls of Helsingborg by a hastily collected army 
of peasants, and were compelled to retire into Zealand. The 
maritime states, afraid lest the northern complications might 
impede their war with France, concluded a treaty at the Hague, by 
which the German territories of Sweden were to be held as neutral. 
But no force could be raised to enforce the neutrality, and as 
Charles XII. rejected the treaty with scorn, it remained little more 
than a dead letter. 

§ 10. While the Swedish territories were being scrambled for in 
the north, Charles was living at Bender, absorbed in an attempt 
to induce the Porte to declare war against Russia. He could urge 
obvious reasons of policy. The Turks had more reason than any 
other European state to dread the growth of the Russian power, 
which was. a constant magnet to their discontented Slav subjects. 
But since the treaty of Carlowitz it was difficult to persuade the 
- Porte to adopt an energetic policy, and Peter was untiring in his 
endeavour to prevent a rupture. Charles’ agent, the Pole Ponia- 
towski, who had helped him to escape from Pultawa, was active in 
all the intrigues at Constantinople, and was supported by the French 
envoy, Désaleurs. ‘They succeeded in overthrowing one vizier after 
another, but the Czar was more lavish of his bribes than they could 
afford to be, and it was not till the end of 1710 that war was declared 
against Russia. Early in the next year a large army was collected 
under the grand vizier, Mehemet Baltadschi. Peter was not slow 
to take measures for repulsing the invasion. Leaving a senate to 
conduct the government in Moscow, he advanced into Moldavia, 
where the Hospodar Kantemir had led him to expect a general 
rising of the population on his behalf. In this act Peter imitated 
the relations of Charles XII. with Mazeppa, and the result was pre- 
cisely similar. Kantemir joined him in person, but brought hardly 
any followers. Peter found himself on the banks of the Pruth inas 
hopeless a situation as that of Charles at Pultawa. He was shut in 
between the river, a morass, and a vastly superior Turkish army. 
Both the Czar and his officers were in dismay, and were in momen- 
tary expectation of annihilation. From this impending disaster 


A.D. 1710-1714. TREATY OF THE PRUTH. 279 


Russia was saved by the folly of the vizier and the energy ofa 
woman. Peter was accompanied by his mistress, Catharine, origin- 
ally a peasant-girl of Esthonia, and destined to be the Czar’s wife 
and successor. She assembled a council of officers, collected what 
treasure she could, and with its aid opened a negotiation with the 
Turkish leader. Baltadschi, probably thinking it better to 
obtain solid advantages, without risking a battle with troops 
maddened by despair, accepted the following terms, which are 
known as the treaty of Husch or of the Pruth (July 23, 1711). Peter 
undertook to restore Azof, to destroy all fortresses on Turkish 
territory, and to allow a free passage to Charles XII. The loss of 
Azof was a blow to the Czar, but it was a very small price to pay 
for his escape from so great a danger. Charles XIL., thinking that 
at last he had his hated enemy in his grasp, arrived in the Turkish 
camp just in time to hear of the conclusion of the treaty. He 
vented his rage in abuse of the vizier, whose dismissal he subse- 
quently obtained from the Sultan; but he failed altogether to bring 
about a renewal of the war. In spite of this blow to his hopes, he 
clung to his project with an obstinacy that verged on madness. 
Hints, entreaties, commands, threats, were powerless to induce him 
to quit Turkey, where his entertainment involved considerable 
annoyance and expense. At last the Sultan gave orders to his 
officers to expel him by force. With a handful of servants he 
defended his house against regular troops, and held it till it was 
fired above his head. The Janissaries were forced into admira- 
tion of the “ Iron-head,” as they called him. He was carried a 
prisoner to Demotica, where he feigned sickness and took to his 
bed. At last he was roused to action by the news that his enemies 
were stripping him of his German possessions. Leaving Turkey, 
after a five years’ residence, he travelled night and day with a 
single companion through Hungary and Germany, and entered 
Stralsund on the 27th November, 1714. 

§ 11. Charles arrived to find Swedish affairs in an almost hopeless 
condition. In 1713 the Russians had taken Helsingfors and re- 
duced Finland. In the next year they occupied the islands of Aland, 
and threatened Stockholm. Peter evidently aimed at acquiring the 
same position as a German prince that the treaty of Wesphalia had 
given to Sweden. He had two nieces, daughters of his half- 
brother Iwan. One of them, Anne, he had married to the duke of 
Courland, the other, Catharine, to the duke of Mecklenburg. These 
marriages were intended as preliminaries toa Russian annexation of 
these provinces. Peter’s ambition was rapidly rousing the jealousy 
of his allies, but at present they were only absorbed in looking 
after acquisitions for themselves. In 1712 the Danes had taken 


280 MODERN EUROPE. Guar. xv. 


Bremen and Verden, and prepared to invade Pomerania. But 
Sweden, exhausted as she was, was not yet powerless. Stenbock, 
the general who had driven the Danes from Helsingborg in 1710, 
now crossed to attack them on the continent, and won a complete 
victory at Gadebusch (December, 1712). Instead of turning to 
attack the Saxons and Russians in Pomerania, he was induced by 
commercial jealousy to destroy, with great barbarity, the flourishing 
port of Altona. Thence he turned to Holstein, where the minister, 
Count Gorz, admitted him into Ténningen. Meanwhile the Danes 
obtained Russian and Saxon reinforcements, which gave them the 
superiority. After seizing Kiel, Gottorp, and Schleswig, they 
forced Stenbock to capitulate with his whole army at Toénningen. 
This event destroyed the last chance of maintaining the southern 
coast of the Baltic for Sweden. Prussia, where Frederick William I. 
had succeeded his father in 1718, at last joined the anti-Swedish 
alliance, in the hope of enforcing the old Hohenzollern claims on 
Pomerania. Hanover, whose elector, George I, had just become 
king of England, was induced to take the same side by being 
allowed to purchase Bremen and Verden from Denmark. Against 
this invincible combination Charles XII. carried on an obstinate but 
hopeless conflict. To make matters worse, discontent was rife in 
his own kingdom. The oligarchy, which had been so ruthlessly 
put down by Charles XI., was beginning to raise its head again, and 
could maintain with plausibility that it was uncontrolled despotism 
that had brought such accumulated disasters. Charles’ heroism 
was unable to hold Stralsund against the overwhelming force that 
advanced to lay siege to it. The capture of the island of Riigen by 
Leopold of Anhalt-Dessau made the town untenable, and Charles 
with great difficulty escaped to Sweden. His departure was 
followed by the complete reduction of Pomerania. With Wismar 
fell the last Swedish possession on German soil (April 20, 1716). 
Charles had been absent from Sweden for sixteen years, but he 
characteristically refused to revisit Stockholm till he could do so as 
a conqueror. He found the nobles actively engaged in intrigues to 
recover their lost privileges. | Charles himself was still unmarried, 
so that his death would raise a question as to the succession. He 
destined the crown for the young duke of Holstein, the son of his 
elder sister Hedwig. But the aristocratic party had induced a 
younger sister, Ulrica Eleanor, to marry the prince of Hesse-Cassel 
without her brother's permission, and was prepared to bring her 
forward as a claimant. Charles treated these intrigues with lofty 
contempt, and took no steps to crush them. His reckless bravery 
made him still popular with the lower classes, in spite of the evils 
he had brought upon them, so that his return forced his enemies to 


ee ae 


A.D. 1712-1716. SCHEMES OF GORZ. 281 


carry on their plots in complete secrecy. He himself thought only 
of continuing the war. For this the first requisite was funds, and 
in raising them he found an able instrument in count Giérz, who 
deserted the service of Holstein for that of Sweden. Gorz was a 
libertine in private life, but was endowed with restless ambition 
and great diplomatic ability, and was an adept in the wild financial 
schemes that were so common in Europe at the time. He raised 
money by expedients that would now be called fraudulent, and 
gradually obtained a complete ascendancy over Charles, who 
appointed him chief minister, to the intense disgust of the nobles 
and the official class. 

§ 12. Girz conceived the happy idea of saving Sweden by taking 
advantage of the manifest discord among her opponents. His plan 
was to buy off the most formidable of these opponents, Russia, and 
to combine with her against the rest. Peter the Great would be 
satisfied with the acquisition of the provinces to the east of the 
Baltic, Carelia, Ingria, Esthonia and Livonia. In return for them 
he would allow Sweden to regain the German territories, and to 
obtain compensation at the expense of Denmark and Hanover. 
Prussia might be compensated for the loss of Pomerania with a 
portion of Poland. There was much to recommend this to the 
Czar, who readily fell in with Girz’s plans at an interview at 
Amsterdam. Peter despised his old ally Augustus, he. cared 
nothing for the Danes, and he positively detested George I., who 
had acquired Bremen and Verden without doing much for the 
common cause, and who had displayed a morbid antipathy to the 
advancing power of Russia. The great obstacle to the success of 
the scheme lay in the naval power of England, which had now fallen 
to the House of Hanover. It was here that Gorz’s plans came 
into contact with those of the Spanish minister Alberoni. Alberoni 
wished to deprive the French regent Orleans of the support of 
England by restoring the Stuarts in that country. Gorz was 
willing to employ the forces of Sweden and Russia for the same 
object. « 

Proofs were soon furnished of the changed relations of the 
northern powers. In 1716 Charles XII. invaded Norway, advanced 
to Christiania, but retired without having effected anything. This 
showed that he had ceased to have any dread of Russia. In this 
very year, Peter had arranged to co-operate with the Danes in an 
invasion of Sweden. But though he sent 40,000 men for the 
purpose, twice the number agreed upon, he refused to take any 
part in the enterprise. The Danes were convinced that but for the 
presence of an English fleet in the Baltic, these troops would have 
been employed against Copenhagen. Meanwhile a great blow had 


14 


282 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP, XIV. 


been given to the scheme of a Jacobite restoration in England. 
Gyllenborg, the Swedish envoy, had been seized in London, and 
Gorz himself was for a short time imprisoned in Holland. Their 
papers disclosed the plot, and its discovery rendered its accomplish- 
ment almost impossible. Still Gorz persevered in his plans. The 
year 1717 was spent in military preparations. In May, 1718, Gorz 
and Gyllenborg met two Russian plenipotentiaries in Losoe, one of 
the Aland islands. ‘There the heads of a treaty were agreed upon. 
In return for the cession of the eastern Baltic provinces, Peter was 
to assist Charles to recover the German territories of Sweden and to 
make further acquisitions from Denmark, Hanover and Poland. 
Leczinski was to be restored to the Polish throne. Sweden was to 
be allowed to annex Norway, but only after she had combined with 
Russia to give the crown of England to James Stuart. Suddenly 
news came which put an end to these negotiations. Charles XII. 
had again invaded Norway and laid siege to the fortress of 
Friedrichshall. As he was going round the trenches he was killed 
by a bullet, fired, according to a rumour which has almost become 
a certainty, not by the enemy, but by a traitor in the service of the 
aristocratic party. 

§ 13. Charles’ death was followed by a complete revolution in 
Sweden. The rightful heir, l'rederick of Holstein-Gottorp, a feeble 
prince, refused the offer of General Diicker to proclaim him as 
king before the army. The council at Stockholm hastened to take 
advantage of his incapacity. Ulrica Eleanor was acknowledged as 
regent, but only on condition that she should immediately summon 
a diet and ratify any changes that should be made in the constitu- 
tion. Then the council proceeded to apprehend Gérz, who was 
hastening to obtain Charles XII.’s approval of the preliminaries 
agreed upon at Losoe. ‘The projected treaty with Russia was 
annulled. The diet met in February, 1719, and speedily agreed 
upon the reforms that were to be imposed on the queen. The 
despotism which Charles XI. had established was swept away. 
The crown was to be no longer hereditary but electives Side by 
side with the sovereign was erected an imperial council or senate 
of twenty-four members, under the presidency of the five chief 
ministers. Without the consent of the council, the queen, who 
was allowed two votes, could do nothing, not even appoint to civil 
or military offices. The council was to be responsible to the diet 
alone, but as the diet lost importance from this time, it was 
practically irresponsible. Thus the government of Sweden ceased 
to be a monarchy and became once more a close oligarchy. Still 
further concessions were extorted from the queen as the price of 
her husband’s elevation to the throne in the next year. 


A.D. 1717-1720. PACIFICATION OF THE NORTH. 283 


The first act of the oligarchy was one of revenge. Count Gorz 
was brought before a specially constituted tribunal, and after a 
shameful parody of a trial was condemned and executed (March, 
1719). His financial projects were abandoned without any regard 
to public faith. But the new government could not be secure as 
long as the war continued. The army was better disposed to the 
monarchy than to the nobles, and moreover the enemies of Sweden 
might at any time gain an advantage by taking up the claims of 
the duke of Holstein. The council hastened to disband a portion 
of the army, already weakened by the loss of 7000 men who had 
been frozen to death in Norway, and to open negotiations with the 
hostile powers. Terms of peace were speedily arranged for 
Hanover by the English minister Carteret (November; 1719). On 
payment of a million thalers the elector-king obtained Bremen and 
Verden. With Poland there was no longer war, as the republic in 
1716 had openly refused to allow Augustus to continue it. The 
only obstacle to a complete pacification lay in the position of 
Stanislaus Leczinski, to whom-Charles XII. had given a residence 
in Zweibriicken, a principality which had hitherto belonged to the 
Swedish kings as the heirs of Charles X. Zweibriicken now passed 
to a nephew of Charles X., the prince of Kleeberg, who was an 
ardent Protestant and already under obligations to Augustus. He 
compelled Stanislaus to quit his territories, and the unfortunate 
prince had to seek a new place of exile in Alsace. This removed 
all cause of hostility between Sweden and Poland, and Augustus 
promised to compensate his rival for his confiscated possessions, a 
promise which was never fulfilled. With Prussia Sweden made a 
treaty in February, 1720. Frederick William I. obtained the part 
of Pomerania lying between the Oder and the Peene, including the 
towns of Stettin and Danzig and the islands of Usedom .and 
Wollin, and agreed in return to pay two million thalers. The 
negotiations with Denmark were more difficult, in spite of the fact 
that the traditional jealousy of the two Scandinavian powers was 
modified at the moment by their mutual antagonism to the duke of 
Holstein. But in July, 1720, a treaty was concluded by the 
mediation of Carteret. Frederick IV. restored to Sweden the 
German territories which shé had occupied in the war, viz., 
Stralsund, Greifswald and the island of Riigen. Sweden on her part 
resigned her exemption from the Sound dues, and allowed Frederick 
to annex Schleswig to his kingdom. He was only prevented from 
taking Holstein too by the intervention of the emperor and the 
German princes. | 

Russia was now the only remaining enemy of Sweden. To 
enforce compliance with his demands, Peter sent a fleet into the 


284 MODERN EUROPE. Cup, x1v. 


Baltic which inflicted enormous damage on the Swedish coast. 
Still the government held out in the confident hope of receiving 
assistance from England. But the English parliament was 
resolutely hostile to any measures that looked like a concession 
to Hanoverian interests, and against this opposition George I.’s 
ministers were powerless. At last the Swedes gave way, and the 
treaty of Nystaidt was signed on the 10th of September, 1720. 
Sweden had to surrender Ingria, Esthonia, Livonia, and the greater 
part of Carelia, while Peter promised to restore Finland, and to 
abstain from interference in the internal affairs of Sweden and 
especially in the question of the succession. This destroyed the 
last chance of the duke of Holstein, who was resident in Russia, 
and who had hoped to obtain his rightful crown with Peter’s 
assistance. The treaty of Nystadt finally settled the great question 
of the supremacy in northern Europe. The position which the 
disunion of Germany and the genius of Gustavus Adolphus had 
won for Sweden was henceforth transferred to Russia. ‘The only 
thing which to some extent neutralised the results of the transfer 
was the as yet almost unnoticed development of Prussia into a state 
of first-rate importance. 

§ 14. Peter’s foreign policy had proved triumphantly successful in 
all points but one. He had failed to obtain the coveted position of 
a German prince. His attempt to retain the hold on Mecklenburg 
which his niece’s marriage had given him, was foiled by the steady 
resistance of the emperor Charles VI., and the intervention of 
Hanover compelled him to withdraw his troops from the province. 
After his peace with Sweden, Peter only undertook one more war, 
that with Persia, which enabled him to extend his territories to the 
Caspian. Throughout his active career he had never relaxed his 
reforming energy. Nothing was too minute for his attention, no 
obstacle so formidable as to daunt him. By constructing roads and 
canals he facilitated intercourse within his vast dominions; by 
treaties with maritime powers he gave an opening to the newly- 
born Russian commerce. ‘The navy was under his personal super- 
vision and special patronage. ‘The transfer of his residence from 
Moscow to St. Petersburg is significant of the grand purpose of his 
life. Moscow remained the centre of everything that was ancient 
and traditional in Russia. Through the new capital was to be 
admitted the civilisation of the west which he so ardently studied 
and appreciated, though he could so imperfectly imitate it. The 
whole system of government was remodelled in imitation of the 
institutions he had seen abroad. In 1711 he abolished the ancient 
douma of the boyards, and replaced it by a senate which consisted 
of the chief ministers of the Czar. In 1718 he suppressed the 


ap. V741S1724 RUSSIA UNDER PETER. 285 


prikayes or commissions, and created ten “colleges,” similar to 
those which the regent Orleans had established in France. <A 
special police department was set on foot, and its powers extended 
by the formation of an inquisition, which rendered great services to 
despotism, but inflicted equal misery upon the Russian people. 
The whole provincial administration was reorganised on a regular 
system. But there was one defect which even Peter was unable 
with the greatest efforts to remedy. He could appoint officials and 
regulate their duties, but he could not make them cease to be 
corrupt. His special favourite, Menschikoff, whom he had raised 
from a humble position, was found to be tainted with the prevalent 
vice, and is said to have received summary chastisement from the 
Czar’s own hand. 

Peter’s reign, like that of many other successful rulers, was 
marred by family troubles. His first wife, Eudoxia, whom he 
repudiated and divorced, had borne him a son, Alexis, who in- 
herited his mother’s antipathy to his father’s policy and person. 
He became the centre of the conservative opposition to reforms and 
foreigners, and the alienation was increased when Peter married his 
mistress, Catharine. In 1712 he attempted to reconcile his son 
with foreign manners and institutions by marrying him to a German 
wife, Charlotte of Brunswick. But the expedient proved a failure ; 
Alexis ill-treated his wife, who died in 1715, after giving birth toa 
son, afterwards Czar as Peter IJ. In 1716 Peter undertook one of 
his journeys westwards, and left the regency to Alexis, whom at 
that time he destined to be his heir.. At Copenhagen Peter heard 
that his son was taking measures to reverse his whole policy. To 
escape the threatened vengeance of his father he fled, first to 
Vienna, and then to Naples. Thither he was tracked by the 
emissaries of the Czar, and compelled to return to St. Petersburg. 
A commission was appointed to try him, and torture was employed 
to extort a confession of conspiracy against his father’s government. 
He was condemned to death, but before the sentence could be 
executed he died in prison, probably from the effects of fresh 
tortures, which were applied to compel further disclosures. Peter 
had now no male heir, except his grandson,-of his own name, and 
he was naturally averse to leave his crown to an infant. Accord- 
ingly, in 1722 he issued a ukase, which conferred upon the reigning 
Czar the right of nominating his successor without any regard to 
birth or hereditary right. This was generally considered to imply 
a determination to give the succession to his wife Catharine, in 
whose capacity he had unlimited confidence. This was confirmed 
by the fact that in 1724 Catharine was solemnly crowned as 
empress. In the same year he gave great alarm to the Swedish 


286 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. XxIv. 


government by betrothing Anne, his eldest daughter by his second 
marriage, to the duke of Holstein. The expected nomination of a 
successor was never made. On the 8th of February, 1725, Peter 
the Great died at the age of fifty-three. His name will always live 
among those of the heroes of history, as the creator of the greatness 
of modern Russia. 

§ 15. Peter’s death was followed by a confused period of Russian 
history. The question of the succession was one rather of parties 
than of persons. The conservative opponents of the late reforms, 
headed by the Jalitsynes, Dolgoroukis and other noble families, put 
forward the claims of the younger Peter, who was now twelve years 
old. Menschikoff, on the other hand, and all the partisans of the 
new régime, were warmly in favour of the widow, Catharine. ‘The 
preference of the army decided the question in her favour. During 
her short reign of two years, Peter’s system of government was 
continued, and Menschikoff, from whose service she had passed to 
become the Czar’s mistress, was. all-powerful in Russia. Before 
Catharine’s death, in 1727, she nominated Peter II. as her successor, 
and appointed a council of regency during his minority, of which 
the chief members were Menschikoff and the duke of Holstein. . In 
the new reign Menschikoff, whose daughter was betrothed to the 
young Czar, became more powerful than ever. He compelled the 
duke of Holstein and his wife to quit Russia for their duchy, and 
he caused himself to be nominated Generalissimo. But his arbitrary 
conduct soon alienated Peter, who secured his liberty by dismissing 
and banishing his dictator and would-be father-in-law. Iwan 
Dolgorouki, the favourite companion of Peter II., was now supreme. 
Under his régime the hopes of the old-Russian party revived. 
The Czar recalled his grandmother Eudoxia from the cloister to the 
court, and went so far as to quit St. Petersburg, to take up his 
residence in Moscow. But the danger of reaction was ended by the 
sudden death of Peter II., of small-pox, in 1780. The male line of 
Peter the Great was now extinct, and the succession was more open 
than ever. Of Peter’s daughters, Anne and Elizabeth, the former 
had died in 1728, leaving a son, afterwards Peter III.. There 
were two other female candidates, the daughters of Peter’s brother 
Iwan, Catharine, duchess of Mecklenburg, and Anne, duchess of 
Courland. Iwan Dolgorouki actually conceived the bold idea 
of claiming the succession for his sister Catharine, on the ground 
that she had been betrothed though not married to Peter II. 
Ultimately the party of the nobles, who were now supreme, 
determined to choose one of the imperial family, but to depart 
as far as possible from the rules of hereditary succession. By 
this means they hoped to obtain concessions which would establish 


“a 


Sec: ites 


Sai ge el tapte 


mnie Od us, i 


A.D. 1725-1730, THE CZARINA ANNE. ~ 287 


their own power on a firm basis. They therefore offered the 
crown to Anne of Courland, but drew up a sort of capitulation 
for her acceptance, which would have transformed Russia into an 
oligarchical republic. The crown was to be elective, and the sover- 
eign was to do nothing without consulting a high council, which 
was to consist of eight members and to fill up vacancies by co- 
optation. Anne accepted the crown and the conditions with which 
the offer was accompanied. But no sooner had she entered Moscow 
than she determined to break her compact. The people, and 
especially the army, preferred autocratic rule to that of a clique of 
nobles. Secure of national support, she boldly repudiated the 
capitulation, and punished its authors by exile and imprisonment. 
The system of Peter the Great was restored in all its entirety, and 
the first attempt to impose constitutional restrictions on a Russian 
sovereign ended in complete failure. 


288 MODERN EUROPE. 


CHAPTER XV. 


FRANCE AFTER THE DEATH OF LOUIS XIV. 


§ 1. Situation of affairs; character of the Regent Orleans. § 2. The 
bastards; overthrow of Louis XIV.’s will; reactionary policy. § 3. 


Financial affairs ; the chambre ardente ; Law’s schemes ; the Mississippi 
ix 


Company. § 4. Financial crash. § 5. England and Spain. § 6. 
Elizabeth of Parma and Alberoni; revival of the Spanish power. 
§ 7. Dubois; the Triple Alliance; Spanish conquest of Sardinia and 
Sicily. § 8. The Quadruple Alliance ; Byng defeats the Spanish fleet ; 
Alberoni’s alliance with Sweden and Russia; conspiracy of Cellamare. 
§ 9. Collapse of Alberoni’s schemes; his dismissal; Spain makes 
peace. § 10. Dubois becomes a cardinal; alliance with Spain; end of 
the regency ; death of Dubois and Orleans. § 11. Ministry of the duke 
of Bourbon; Louis XV. marries Marie Leczinska; religious persecu- 
tion; Fleury becomes chief minister ; his domestic policy. 


§ 1. THe death of Louis XIV. was an event of the greatest import- 
ance to Europe, and much more so to France. He had established 
a centralised monarchy, which crushed all independent life in the 
capital and the provinces, and which had obtained absolute control 
not only over politics, but also over religion and literature. The 
government was one vast machine which was worked by the will of 
a single man or of those who could influence him. Yor a time the 
system had been triumphantly successful. France had extended its 
frontiers, increased its resources, and raised itself almost to 
supremacy in Europe. But in the later years of the long reign 
these successes had been overshadowed by failures. Religious 
intolerance had crushed domestic industry, and had raised a 
powerful combination of foreign enemies. In a war of dynastic 
ambition France had squandered her resources till the state was 
well-nigh bankrupt, and had lost that military reputation which 
had been the most popular gift of the Bourbon kings. The question 
now arose as to whether the system of Louis XIV. could possibly 
survive him. It is probable that he himself recognised the impossi- 
bility, and in fact he was partially responsible for it. In his later 
years he had surrounded himself with docile followers of his own 
will in preference to able ministers, and the result was that he left 
behind him no statesman capable of carrying on his work. Even 


Oe a _ 


A.D. 1715. THE REGENT ORLEANS. 289 


his own descendants had shown themselves by no means enamoured 
of his principles of government. His grandson, the duke of 
Burgundy, the pupil of Fénelon and the idol of popular hopes, had 
drawn up schemes of reform which were directly antagonistic to the 
system of the grand monarque. Had he lived to ascend the throne, 
France would have had an opportunity of testing the worth of that 
paternal despotism which was so popular in the eighteenth century, 
and which found its ablest exponents in* Frederick the Great and 
Joseph II. But his early death had marred this prospect, and had 
left the succession to his second son, Louis XV., a sickly infant of 
five years old. 

The future of France depended on the nica of a regent. 
Custom rather than detinite law assigned the office to the nearest 
prince of the blood royal, who would be the natural heir in case of 
the minor’s death. In the present case this was the young king’s 
uncle, Philip V. of Spain. But then the treaty of Utrecht and his 
own renunciation excluded him from the succession in France, and 
any attempt to give him the regency must have aroused a new 
European war. Next to him stood Philip duke of Orleans (born 
1674), the second son of Louis XIV.’s only brother Philip, and of 
Elizabeth Charlotte, daughter of the elector palatine. He was 
the most brilliant prince whom the house of Bourbon had produced 
since Henry LV. Not only was he accomplished as a painter and a 
musician, he had studied philosophy under Leibnitz, and natural 
science under Homberg, and his natural abilities enabled him to 
master any subject without exhausting effort. As a general he had 
shown himself both brave and competent, had gained the affection of 
his troops, and might have won the laurels of a conqueror if he had 
not been hampered by his uncle’s jealousy. But all his great 
qualities were marred by still more conspicuous defects. The same 
ambition which induced him to study widely if not deeply, led him 
also to seek preeminence in frivolity and vice. His natural inclina- 
tion to sensual indulgence had been encouraged by a congenial 
tutor, the abbé Dubois. His mother used to apply to him the old 
fable of the prince who received every good quality from his fairy 
godmothers, until one old fairy, indignant at not being invited, 
added a curse which rendered all the other gifts useless. At Louis 
XIYV.’s court Philip of Orleans had come to be regarded as a monster 
of iniquity. The successive deaths of the royal princes had been 
attributed by popular rumour to his ambition to obtain the crown 
for himself, and he had been allowed no opportunity to clear him- 
self from the suspicion. This was the man who was destined to 
govern Irance for the next eight years, and to leave a permanent 
impress on his RoUnSy s history. 

14* 


290 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. Xv. 


§ 2. It was natural that Louis XIV. should regard the prospect 
with misgiving, and that Madame de Maintenon should suggest 
measures to avert it. A will was drawn up with the intention of 
ensuring the permanence of the existing system. Tor this purpose 
Louis had no one to rely upon but his illegitimate children by 
Madame de Montespan, the duke of Maine and the count of 
Toulouse. Though they had been born in the lifetime of M. de 
Montespan and acknowledged by him, the king had not scrupled 
to give them, first the name of Bourbon, then a rank immediately 
after the royal family, and finally, in 1714, the right of eventual 
succession to-.the throne itself. Madame de Maintenon, who had 
risen to influenc> as the governess of the two bastards, spared no 
pains to secure their advancement. The royal will entrusted the 
government during the minority to a council of fifteen, including 
Maine, ‘Toulouse, Villeroy, Tallard, etc. Of this council the duke 
of Orleans was to be president, so that the only power allowed him 
was that of giving a casting-vote in case of an equal division. The 
guardianship of the young king’s person was entrusted to the 
duke of Maine, who was also to have the command of the royal 
guards. 

This arrangement had too many inherent defects to be lasting. 
A council of fifteen was obviously too large a body to govern a 
country like France, which was now habituated to despotic rule. 
This would have been the case even if there had been tolerabie 
unanimity among its members, but there were certain to be endless 
quarrels between the dukes of Orleans and Maine. The former 
determined from the first to get rid of the will and to obtain the 
power which he considered to belong to him by right. He had on 
his side all the classes who were discontented with the late régime ; 
the nobles who wished to recover some of their former power, and 
who were disgusted by the elevation of the bastards; the members 
of the Parliament of Paris, which had been reduced to powerless 
insignificance by the late king; the Jansenists, who saw an 
opportunity of escaping from their Jesuit persecutors. The duke 
of Orleans roused himself for a moment from his inglorious dissipa- 
tions, and spared no pains to ensure the success of his scheme. 


The instrument which he intended to employ was the Parliament — 


of Paris, which seventy years ago had revoked the will of Louis XTIL, 
and was eager to seize a new chance of enforcing its claim to 
political power. On the 2nd of September, 1715, the Parliament 
held a formal session, at which the princes of the blood royal and 
the peers of France were present. Without any difficulty the duke 
of Orleans obtained the ratification of his wishes. He was appointed 
regent with full powers of granting offices and disposing of the 


Av. 1715. FRANCE UNDER THE REGENCY. 291 


revenue. ‘The command of the household troops was taken away 
from the duke of Maine, although he was allowed to remain 
guardian of the young king. 

Thus the system of per conn government was retained in Wrage 
but in the hands of Philip of eleahs instead of Louis XIV. 'The 
regent was practically pledged to a policy of reaction, in order to 
gratify his supporters among the nobles and the Parliament. He 
was guided to a great extent by the schemes that had been drawn 
up by the duke of Burgundy and by the advice of St. Simon, whose 
memoirs give us the most vivid if not the most trustworthy picture 
of the history of this period. A council of regency was appointed, 
with the duke of Bourbon, the representative of the legitimate 
princes, as its president, but including amongst its members the 
duke of Maine and the count of Toulouse. Then followed the 
distinct departure from the late régime. Instead of entrusting 
the various departments to ministers, acting in direct subordina- 
tion to the crown, six councils of ten members each were created, 
for war, the navy, commerce, finance, home and foreign affairs. A 
seventh council, of conscience, to regulate ecclesiastical matters, had 
been created by the late king, but it was now employed for wholly 
different objects. The presidency was given to cardinal Noailles, 
the representative of the opposition to the Jesuits and the bull 
Unigenitus. Pere le Tellier was banished, and the Jansenists 
flocked back to Paris. Literature became once more independent. 
Fénélon’s 7Télémaque was published and Voltaire began to write. 
The regent even meditated a restoration of the edict of Nantes, but 
was dissuaded from making so violent a change. In all points the 
old repressive government was given up to make way for a milder 
and more constitutional system. The’ Parliament of Paris was 
allowed to resume the right which it had lost of making 
remonstrances before registering the royal edicts. 

The change was so complete as to amount to a revolution. If it 
had proved successful and permanent it would have made the 
most material difference to the history of France. But it failed 
lamentably, and the causes of its failure are not far to seek. The 
institutions were good enough, but there was a woful lack of 
capacity and honesty in the men who were to work them. The 
nobles, who had a majority of places in the councils, were wholly 
untrained to the work of administration, and were jealous of their 
colleagues, the lawyers, who possessed the requisite training and 
intelligence. Above all the regent himself was no duke of 
Burgundy ; he had carried through the reforms not for their own 
sake, but merely to secure his personal power. Oncé he had 
obtained this object, he returned to the pursuit of his own selfish 


292 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. xv. 


pleasures. He surrounded himself with worthless associates whom 
he cynically called his rowés, because they deserved to be broken 
on the wheel. His orgies at the Palais Royal were a disgrace not 
only to his country, but to his age. No prosperity could be 
enjoyed by France under the rule of so vicious a profligate. Thanks 
to Dubois, the government was carried on not without ability and 
with some amount of success. But there was one department, that 
of finance, in which reform was urgently needed, but where it could 
only be effected by conspicuous ability and honesty. It was here 
that the regency found its greatest difficulty, and met with its 
most unqualified failure. 

§ 3. The war of the Spanish succession had exhausted the re- 
sources of France. ‘The annual expenses amounted to 248 millions of 
francs, while the revenue was only 186 millions, and that had been 
anticipated for two years to come. There was an immense floating 
debt consisting of government paper, which had sunk to a third of 
its nominal value. There was evidently a difficult task before 
the council of finance, which the regent appointed under the 
presidency of the duke of Noailles. St. Simon, imbued with aris- 
tocratic contempt and hatred for financiers and men of business, 
proposed to ruin the state creditors by summoning the States 
General and declaring a national bankruptcy. This expedient was 
rejected, but the measures which the government adopted were 
scarcely less revolutionary or more inconsistent with the lawful 
rights of property. An extraordinary tribunal, known as_ the 
chambre ardente, was erected to inquire into the conduct of the 
financiers, and to confiscate what it pleased the government to call 
their ill-gotten gains. Informers were to be rewarded with a share 
of the spoils. For a year the work of judicial robbery was carried on 
with rigorous severity and amidst popular applause. But it was 
~ soon discovered that the nation profited little from the persecution. 
The confiscated wealth passed not into the treasury, but into the 
pockets of the regent and his associates, who also found a new mode 
of acquiring riches in selling their protection to the terrified 
millionaires. Finally, in 1717, the authority of the tribunal was 
revoked by an edict, which did not hesitate to avow that corruption 
was too wide-spread to be investigated or punished. The financial 
difficulty was as great as ever, and Noailles and his council had 
failed to meet it. 

The regent was now induced to listen to the advice of a congenial 
spirit, John Law, the son of an Edinburgh goldsmith, who had 
pursued his financial speculations at the gaming-tables of Europe. 
He was a fanatical believer in the power of credit, which was just 
beginning to play a new and unprecedented part in commercial 


> a ee 


. ee eg ee ee ee a 


Fg Ve ee ie 


A.D. 1715-1717. FINANCIAL SCHEMES OF LAW. 293 


transactions. In his opinion it was credit which had enabled 
England and Holland to bear the expenses of the recent war so 
much more easily than France had done. His scheme was to form 
a bank which should have at its back all the resources of the state, 
as security for the issue of paper-money. As further security he 
intended gradually to get the whole commerce of the country under 
the control of the central bank. Thus an almost unlimited amount 
of paper could be put into circulation, which would perform all the 
functions of specie, indefinitely multiply the national wealth, give a 
new impulse to manufactures and trade, and enable the government 
to pay off the debt without effort or sacrifice. The scheme 
had a political as well as a flnancial significance. If successfully 
carried out, it would give the monarchy a power far greater and 
more centralised than Louis XIV. had ever dreamed of obtaining. 
At the same time the issue of paper money would enable the 
government to re-purchase the offices which had been sold to 
individuals, and thus to recover absolute control over the magis- 
tracy. It was this aspect of the scheme which led Montesquieu 
to call Law the greatest supporter of despotism that ever lived, and 
it was this which raised against him the opposition of the Parliament 
and other institutions whose independence was threatened. 

The gigantic proportions of the scheme fascinated the mind of 
the regent. But it was based upon a fundamental error, which 
is easily to be discerned by the light of modern political economy. 
In those days money was regarded not so much as an instrument 
for effecting the exchange of wealth, but as wealth itself. If 
this was erroneous in the case of specie, it was still more 
erroneous in that of paper-money. This was what Law failed 
to perceive. To him every increase of the circulating medium, 
and such an increase could certainly be effected by his plan, implied 
a direct increase of wealth. The nation was destined to suffer for 
the erroneous opinions which he shared with almost all his con- 
temporaries. 

Law’s proposals had at first been rejected by the influence of 
Noailles, but he was allowed in 1716 to found an independent 
bank, which proved a great success. In the next year it was raised 
to be a government institution. Law was now enabled to develope 
his scheme without hindrance. He formed the great Mississippi 
Company, to which the regent granted the recently discovered 
territory of Louisiana, and the capital was named New Orleans in 
his honour. ‘The company soon displayed extraordinary activity. 
It assumed: the management of the tobacco monoply, and advanced 
1200 millions to the government at three per cent. to redeem debts 
which had been contracted at a much higher rate of interest. The 


294 MODERN EUROPE. Cuar. xv. 


shares were greedily sought after and rapidily rose to four times 
their original value. A perfect mania for stock-jobbing set in, 
which can only be paralleled from the history of the contemporary 
South Sea Company in England. The Rue Quincampoix, where 
the company took up its headquarters, was thronged with eager 
and excited speculators. Meanwhile all sorts of paper-money, bank 
notes and company’s bonds, were circulated in profusion and readily 
taken up, although many of the cooler speculators, including Law 
himself, were not slow to realise their paper in the purchase of landed 
estates. In spite of this success the scheme met with vehement oppo- 
sition in the Parliament of Paris and elsewhere, which the regent put 
down with a firm hand. WNoailles, who refused to have anything 
to do with Law, was dismissed and replaced by D’Argenson. 'The 
seals were taken away from the chancellor D’Aguesseau and were also 
transferred to D’Argenson. The regent did not scruple to depart 
altogether from the engagements which he had made to secure his 
power. The Parliament was deprived of its right of remonstrance, the 
administrative councils were suppressed, to the great disappoint- 
ment of the nobles, the bastards of the late king were degraded from 
the royal rank to which he had raised them, and the personal 
guardianship of the young king was taken from the duke of Maine 
and given to the duke of Bourbon. Tinally, Law became a Roman 
Catholic, and this removed the obstacle to his appointment as 
financial minister. 

§ 4. In 1720 came the inevitable crash. ‘There had undoubtedly 
been an increase of wealth in France, because speculation had given 
some impulse to commerce. But it was nothing in comparison with 
the enormous increase in the circulating currency. The result was 
soon visible. Whenever the medium for circulating commodities in- 
creases out of proportion to the commodities which it has to circulate, 
the result is that each commodity commands a larger part of the 
medium, that is, its price increases. This was the first effect of Law’s 
employment of credit. Prices rose all round without any benefit 
to either consumer or producer. This, if not advantageous, was 
not in itself harmful. But matters became worse when the paper- 
money began to drive specie out of circulation. Those who 
possessed gold and silver either hoarded it or sent it out of the 
country. It was in vain that edicts were issued imposing a penalty 
on hoarding and endeavouring to maintain the paper at a fictitious 
value. They served only to shake the confidence of the public, 
upon'which the wnole stability of the scheme rested. Everybody 
who held paper hastened to realise, and there were no sufficient 
funds to meet the demand. Shares fell at once and a panic set in 
which involved both bank and company in a common ruin. The 


» 
— _— 


i 


a ae 


A.D. 1716-1720. FINANCIAL COLLAPSE. 295 


regent published an absurd edict which reduced the value of the 
company’s paper by half, and fixed the shares at their original price 
of 500 livres. He had to withdraw the edict after three days, but 
the» popular indignation was so great that it is marvellous how the 
government managed to survive the crisis. There was no one in 
France to play the part which Walpole played in England, when 
the South Sea bubble burst. In fact it is stated that the regent 
and his associates were partially responsible for the extent of the 
disaster. Careless what means they employed to acquire wealth, 
they had issued paper-money from the bank of their own accord, 
beyond even the very extreme limits prescribed by Law. The 
bank had to cease payment, and thus the national bankruptcy 
which St. Simon had so cynically advocated, was brought about 
without intention. Law had to escape for his life and he carried 
with him but a scanty remnant of the enormous fortune which he 
had amassed. He died in poverty at Venice in 1729, still preserv- 
ing an unshaken belief in the principles of his system. 

The disaster seemed for the moment to have ruined France, but 
it proved ultimately to be less serious than could have been antici- 
pated. The losses had fallen rather on individuals than on the 
nation as a whole. Credit was shaken, but the national wealth was 
undiminished. The winding up of affairs was entrusted to the 
brothers Paris, the ablest financiers of the old school. The bank 
was abolished, but the Mississippi Company continued to exist as a 
trading corporation. Ruinous as the excitement had been, it had 
yet given a real and lasting impulse to commercial and colonial 
activity. And, what was of more immediate moment to the 
government, the state emerged from the crisis with a substantially 
diminished debt. 

§ 5. The duke: of Orleans was more successful if not more 
disinterested in the management of foreign affairs than in that of 
finance. In both he acted, not on his own initiative, but on the 
advice of an adventurer, in the one case of Law, in the other of the 
abbé Dubois. At the time of his accession there were two powers 
with which France was brought into the closest relations, and with 
which it was necessary to be on terms either of alliance or hostility 
England and Spain. 

England had been the most determined and formidable opponent 
of Louis XIV. In the war of the Spanish succession she had ruined 
the prestige of the French arms. At the very time of his death the 
late king was engaged in furthering a rebellion, which aimed at the 
expulsion of the new Hanoverian dynasty. The regent had already 
opened a connexion with George I., but he did not venture to 
depart all at once from the traditions of French policy. The 


296 MODERN EUROPE. CHap. xy. 


pretender was allowed to cross France without hindrance, and to 
embark at Dunkirk for the coast of Scotland. On the suppression 
of the revolt (1716), no opposition was made to his return, and he 
took up his residonce at Avignon. The presence of the Stuarts 
within the Trench borders was a constant menace to the English, 
who also clamoured against the rising fortifications of Mardyck, 
which threatencd to be a second Dunkirk. Moreover the position 
of the regent depended altogether on the provisions of the treaty of 
Utrecht. That treaty had been the work of the Tories, and was 
extremely distasteful to the Whig ministry, which had come into 
power with the accession of George I. 

Spain was ruled by Philip V. who, after Louis XV., was the 
head of the house of Bourbon. © Although he was thus the natural 
ally of Francc, he was equally the bitter enemy of the duke of 
Orleans. Weak, hypochondriacal, bigoted, the slave of his wife, 
his character was diametrically opposed to that of the regent, whom 
he always regarded as the murderer of his brothers and nephew, and 
as the supplanter of himself. or in spite of his solemn renuncia- 
tions and the guarantee of the European powers, Philip V. clung 
obstinately to his claim to the French crown. In what was regarded 
as the probable event of Louis XV.’s death, he was determined to 
enforce his claim, even if he had to abdicate the throne of 
Spain. He had one other guiding passion, bitter enmity to the 
emperor Charles VI., who still retained the title of king of Spain, 
and who had robbed that monarchy of its fairest provinces in Italy. 
These provinces Philip was determined to regain at all costs, and in 
this he was encouraged by the two people who had supreme in- 
fluence over him, his wife, and his minister. 

§ 6. In1714 Philip V.’s first wife, Maria Louisa of Savoy, had died. 
Her favourite, the princess Orsini, who had governed Spain through 
her, was anxious to perpetuate her influence by finding a submissive 
successor for her late mistress. While she was hesitating Alberoni, 
who was acting as representative of Parma at Madrid, suggested 
Hlizabeth Farnese, niece of the duke of Parma. He painted her 
character in accordance, not with truth, but with the wishes of the 
princess, and the match was arranged. The first act of the new 
queen was to dismiss the princess Orsini with brutality, and the 
exiled favourite had to retire to France. Elizabeth of Parma, in 
spite of the retirement in which she had heen hrought up, soon 
developed unbridled ambition and an aptitude for intrigue. As 
Philip’s children by his first wife would exclude her own sons from 
the .Spanish crown, she was anxious to obtain for the latter the 
reversion of the duchies of Parma and Tuscany to which she had 
had an eventual claim. It was with this end in view that she 


Ap. 1714-1716. ALBERONI. 297 


encouraged her husband’s designs in Italy, while her own ambition 
made her eager to see him on the French throne. 

Elizabeth’s influence over her husband secured pre-eminence to 
her own countryman, Alberoni, who had contributed so essentially 
to bring about her marriage. Alberoni was the son of a gardener in 
Piacenza,’ where he was born in 1664. By his own ability and 
industry he had raised himself from obscurity, and he sought in 
the church the only career that was open to talent without birth. 
He acquired the favour of Vendome, by a skilful combination of the 
functions of a buffoon and a cook, had accompanied that commander 
to Spain, and remained there after the death of his patron. Though 
nominally only agent for the court of Parma, he became in reality 
prime minister of Spain. In this position he conceived an ardent 
affection for the country of his adoption, and determined to raise it 
from depression to the commanding position which it had once 
occupied in Kurope. He spared no pains to develop the internal 
resources which had been so long neglected. Commerce and 
industry of all kinds revived under his patronage; the army was 
reorganised, and the revenue increased. But his chief attention 
was given to the navy. It was on the sea that Spain had risen to 
greatness, and it was by the sea that Alberoni sought to revive it 
from torpor. Foreigners who had known Spain during the succession 
war were astounded at the strides which the country had made 
under the new administration. Alberoni himself is said to have 
assured Philip, that with five years of peace he would make him 
the most powerful sovereign in Kurope. But these years of peace 
he was not destined to have. While devoted to Spain, he was not 
forgetful of the interest of his native Italy, which he was anxious 
to free from the hated domination of Austria. This was to be the 
ultimate employment of the revived power of Spain, and it was 
this which made Alberoni agree cordially with Philip’s detestation of 
Charles VI. At the same time his own position as a foreigner who 
was detested by the Spanish nobles made him completely de- 
pendent on his master’s favours, and he was thus compelled to fall in 
with the designs upon the French crown and the hustility to the 
regent Orleans. It was necessary for Spain to have allies, and 
her most natural and most efficient ally was England. ‘To England 
Spain could offer two bribes, the prompt fulfilment of the com- 
mercial stipulations of the Utrecht treaty, and the severance of 
French and Spanish policy which had been the essential object 
of the late war. Alberoni did all in his power to purchase at this 
price the adherence of England to the interests of Spain. 

§ 7. The attitude assumed by Philip V. and Alberoni really left 
the regent little choice as to the policy which he should pursue. 


298 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. xv. 


But it is doubtful whether of his own accord he would have acted 
with such firmness and decision, but for the influence of his adviser 
and former tutor, Dubois. Dubois was a native of southern France, 
of distinguished talents but detestable character. Appointed as 
tutor to the young Philip when duke of Chartres, he had gained a 
fatal influence by at once cultivating his intellect and encouraging 
his inclination to vicious pleasures in which he himself indulged. 
When Philip became regent, Dubois was appointed a councillor, 
and at once assumed the chief direction of foreign affairs, in which 
he displayed the greatest skill and dexterity. His policy, as was 
natural, was dictated rather by the interests of the house of Orleans 
than by those of France. He conceived the bold idea of departing 
altogether from the traditions of Louis XIV. and forming a close 
alliance between France and England. The link was to be the 
common interests of the two families of Orleans and Hanover. 
Both were threatened by rivals, the one by the Stuarts, the other 
by the king of Spain on the one hand and the legitimised princes 
on the other. Each could secure the other against its enemies. 
This alliance was destined to prove fatal to the magnificent schemes 
of Alberoni. 

In July, 1716, Dubois visited Holland on a pretence of purchasing 
books, and there had an interview with George I. and his minister 
Stanhope, who were on their way to Hanover. The terms of a 
convention was speedily arranged. France undertook to destroy 
the fortifications of Mardyck, to compel the pretender to depart 
from Avignon, and to afford him no further countenance or assis- 
tance. Both powers undertook to guarantee the execution of 
the treaty of Utrecht, especially of the articles which secured the 
Protestant succession-in England and the exclusion of the Spanish 
king from the throne of France. In January, 1717, the treaty was 
accepted by Holland, and has since been known as the Triple 
Alliance. 

It marks a complete revolution in European politics. French 
historians are never tired of reviling a treaty which, according to 
them made France the slave of England, much as Charles II. had 
been dependent upon Louis XIV. forty years before. They have 
certainly a formal ground of complaint. George I. was allowed to 
retain the title of King of France, while Louis XV. had _ to 
content himself with the designation of Most Christian King. It 
was stated, and not improbably with truth, that Dubois received a 
pension from the Hanoverian court. 

Not content with his alliance with England, Dubois also com- 
menced a project which involved a departure from the treaty of 
Utrecht. George I., as elector of Hanover, was bound to the 


ta 
a 


4 


a” a 


ee 


MS? ale £m 


A.D. 1716-1718. THE QUADRUPLE ALLIANCE. 299 


Hapsburg interests, and had recently concerted an arrangement 
with Charles VL, by which the latter was to obtain Sicily, which 
the treaty had given to Savoy, and to compensate the duke by the 
cession of Sardinia. Dubois. induced the regent to approve of this 
arrangement, and France and England endeavoured to obtain the 
consent of Spain by offering to guarantee the claim of Don Carlos, 
the elder son of Philip and Elizabeth, to the duchies of Parma and 
Tuscany. But the negotiation proved fruitless. Alberoni had 
just extorted the cardinal’s hat from the pope, and was resolute in. 
his opposition to a proposal which would strengthen the power of 
the emperor in Italy. He was still anxious to avoid a war until 
the warlike preparations which he was conducting with boundless 
energy were completed. But his hand was forced by an unexpected 
event. The grand inquisitor of Spain, as he was returning from 
Rome, was arrested in Lombardy as a rebellious subject of Charles III. 
of Spain. This insult. roused the bitter indignation of Philip V., 
who resolved on an immediate rupture. Alberoni’s remonstrances 
were unavailing, and all he could do was to postpone an attack 
upon Naples or Sicily to an invasion of Sardinia. In August, 1717, 
a Spanish army landed in Sardinia, was favourably received by the 
inhabitants, and in little more than two months made itself master 
of the island. 

The conquest of Sardinia roused the greatest enthusiasm in Spain, 
so long unaccustomed to military successes. Alberoni alone refused 
to be carried away by the general triumph. But it was too late 
for him to turn back, and he was forced to hurry on the prepara- 
tions for the attack upon Sicily, which was to be made in the next 
year. His energy seemed to galvanise the inert mass with new life. 
Forgotten industries were revived, ships were built and fitted 
out, and troops were raised even in the discontented provinces of 
Aragon and Catalonia. In July, 1718, the fleet sailed from 
Barcelona to Palermo. Victor Amadeus of Savoy had character- 
istically refused to commit himself to either side. Conscious that, 
whichever won, he could not retain Sicily, he withdrew most of 
his troops from the island, so that no effective resistance was made 
to the Spanish occupation. 

§ 8. Meanwhile the emperor had iefealed to the members of the 
Triple Alliance to assist him in repelling so unprovoked an attack 
and to uphold the treaty of Utrecht. A conference was opened in 
London at which France and the’ maritime powers concerted 
measures to force peace upon Spain. Dubois was again the moving 
spirit of the negotiations, which ended in the drawing up-of a 
treaty in August, 1718. By this the emperor was to renounce all 
claims upon. Spain and the Indies, while Philip made a similar 


300 MODERN EUROPE. CHar. xy. 


renunciation of the Spanish provinces which had passed to Austria. 
Savoy was to give Sicily to the emperor in exchange for Sardinia; 
the succession to Parma and Tuscany was to be secured to the 
children of Philip’s second marriage. The treaty was at once 
signed by the imperial representative, and thus became known as 
the Quadruple Alliance. No pains were spared to induce Spain to 
accept the proffered terms. ‘The English ministers went so far as 
to risk their popularity by offering to restore Gibraltar. But 
Philip and Alberoni, probably trusting that the emperor’s allies 
“would content themselves with protests, were obstinate in refusing 
to negotiate on these terms. Their hopes were doomed to dis- 
appointment. Already an English fleet under admiral Byng had 
been sent into the Mediterranean. It is impossible to acquit 
England of the desire to crush the maritime power of Spain, which 
had once been so formidable and which was so unexpectedly revived. 
On the 11th of August, Byng attacked the. Spanish fleet off Cape 
Passaro and completely destroyed it. This was a decisive triumph 
for the Quadruple Alliance. Dubois, its chief author, was rewarded 
with the portfolio of foreign affairs, the council which had hitherto 
directed them having been dissolved. 

Alberoni was now driven in despair to form those projects which 
are usually associated with his name, and which have created the 
unjust impression that his policy was chimerical and unsound, He 
must meet coalition by coalition. With regard to Austria his hopes 
had been disappointed. The attempts to raise a new rebellion in 
Hungary had failed, and the Turks, who had hitherto occupied the 
emperor’s attention and arms, had just concluded the treaty of 
Passarowitz. But the governments of England and France were 
both threatened by formidable enemies, to whom the Spanish 
minister now turned. He invited the Pretender to Spain, prepared 
a new expedition on his behalf, and concerted with count Gérz a 
grand scheme by which Sweden and Russia were to be reconciled, 
and were to combine in supporting the Jacobites against the 
IJanoverian dynasty. At the same time, through the Spanish 
envoy Cellamare, he opened a connection with the malcontent 
opponents of the regency in France. A conspiracy was arranged, 
of which the duchess of Maine and Cardinal Polignac were the 
centre, to depose the duke of Orleans and to give the regency 
to Philip V., who promised as his first act to summons the States 
General. 

§ 9. All these projects failed one after the other. Charles XII. 
was killed before Friedrichshall, and the plan ofa northern coalition 
against England came to nothing with the execution of Gérz. The 
Spanish fleet which was to carry the pretender to the English 


; 
‘ 


A.D. 1718—1720. FALL OF ALBERONI. 301 


coast was destroyed by.a storm in the bay of Biscay. The con- 
spiracy of Cellamare was no secret to Dubois, who only waited a 
favourable opportunity to crush it. The ambassador himself, the 
duke and duchess of Maine, and a number of others were arrested 
and thrown into prison. An attempted rising in Brittany was 
suppressed before Alberoni had time to send the promised assistance. 
Dubois now induced the regent to declare war against Spain, and a 
French army under Berwick crossed the Pyrenees (April, 1719). 
The Spanish army being engaged in Sicily, the only opponents of 
the invaders were worn out veterans and raw recruits. An English 
squadron under Stanhope gratified the national love of a maritime 
monopoly by burning along the coast the vessels and docks which 
it had been the pride of Alberoni to create. The emperor, freed 
from the Turkish war, was able to send an army into Sicily, and 
the Spaniards after a heroic defence of Messina had to evacuate the 
island. It was impossible for Spain to continue the war, but the 
allies were determined not to make peace until they had procured 
the dismissal of the minister whom they unjustly accused of having 
broken it. Philip V. was dexterously influenced by the production 
of some letters, in which Alberoni had spoken contemptuously of 
his master’s ability. On the 5th of December, 1719, Alberoni 
received orders to quit the capital and the kingdom. Even in his 
exile he was pursued by the bitter hostility of the sovereign whom 
he had served too well. It was not till the death of Clement XI. 
that he ventured to visit Rome, where he spent the greater part of 
his remaining days, and where he died in 1752, at the age of 87. 
On his withdrawal, Spain sank back into the lethargy from which 
it had been roused by the genius and enterprise of a single man. 
In February, 1720, Philip V. accepted the terms of the Quadruple 
Alliance. Charles VI. obtained Sicily, and Victor Amadeus had to 
put up with Sardinia, which his family has ever since retained. 

§ 10. With the close of the Spanish war, and the ruin of Law’s 
financial system, the regency of Orleans loses its importance in 
European history. Dubois was now all-powerful, but he was 
anxious to secure his position by obtaining a rank which corresponded 
to it. This could only be done by inducing the pope to grant him 
a cardinal’s hat. The intervention of England easily persuaded the 
regent to appoint him archbishop of Cambray. But with Rome 
there were two difficulties to be overcome ; the notorious character 
of the aspirant to the purple, which might possibly be overlooked, 
and the favour which the regency had shown to the Jansenists. 
This latter obstacle was a serious one, but Dubois determined to 
surmount it. Turning his attention to religious matters, he 
obtained such an interpretation of the ,bull Unigenitus, that even 


302 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP, xv. 


its great opponent, the cardinal Noailles, was induced to accept it. 
Thus the schism in the Gallican church was healed. Still 
Clement XJ. remained inexorable, but his successor, Inno- 
cent XIII., proved more complacent, and in 1721 Dubois was raised 
to the cardinalate. He now assumed a seat in the council of 
regency immediately after the princes of royal blood, and before 
long was made chief minister of France. 

What he had gained by this dexterous change in internal politics 
he was prepared to confirm by a change in foreign relations. Spain, 
being no longer formidable to the regent, might now be won over 
to his side. A double marriage was arranged, by which Louis XY. 
was betrothed to the infant daughter of Philip V., while the 
daughter of the duke of Orleans was married to the prince of 
Asturias. To conciliate the prejudices of Philip, the court was 
restored from Paris to Versailles. It says much for Dubois’ 
ingenuity that this Spanish alliance was contracted without at all 
interrupting the cordiality between France and England. 

In February, 1725, Louis XV. obtained his legal majority at the 
age of thirteen, and the regency came to an end. But all precau- 
tions had been taken to prevent a change of government. Villeroy, 
the preceptor of the young king and a devoted adherent of the 
system of Louis XIV., had been driven from court, and Dubois 
remained all-powerful minister. But he was not destined to enjoy 
his power long. His constitution was worn out by debauches, and 
he died suddenly from the effects of a slight accident (August 10, 
1723). His place as minister was taken by the duke of Orleans, 
but he too was carried off four months later by a stroke of apoplexy 
(December 7). 

§ 11. On the death of Orleans, the chief influence over the young 
king was exercised by his preceptor, the abbé Fleury. He might 
have seized the reins of power at once, but his habitual caution 
restrained him. He persuaded the king to appoint as chief minister 
the duke of Bourbon, who, after the young duke of Orleans, was the 
nearest prince of the blood-royal. Bourbon, who is usually known 
as Monsieur le Duc, was a grandson of the great Condé, but wholly 
unworthy of the descent. He possessed neither ability nor character, 
and was the slave of his mistress, the marquise de Prie. The 
guiding motive of his policy was to secure the intluence of the 
house of Condé at the expense of his relatives of Orleans. With 
this object in view, the recently arranged marriage for the king was 
revoked and the infanta sent back to Spain, on the pretext that she 
was too young for a king that had no heir. A new bride was found for 
Louis in Marie Leczinska, daughter of Stanislaus ex-king of Poland, 
who was now living in retirement at Weissemburg in Alsace. The 


A.D. 1721—1730. BOURBON AND FLEURY. 303 


comparative obscurity of her origin made it probable that she would 
remain grateful to those who had raised her to power. But the 
duke discovered that he gained little by the move. His domestic 
policy made him hated, while there was nothing about him to 
inspire respect. He persecuted the Protestants with revolting 
cruelty. He imposed a tax upon land and extorted it from the 
privileged classes, the nobles and clergy. All the malcontents 
turned to Fleury, who had just been made a cardinal, and who now 
determined to grasp the authority which he had always coveted. 
In June, 1726, the duke and his ministers received orders to leave 
the court. The king announced his intention of ruling in person, 
but this was only intended as a flimsy disguise for the supremacy 
of his preceptor. 

Fleury, who was sixty-three years old, was laborious, economical, 
disinterested, a very favourable contrast to the recent rulers of 
France. But his age and his natural temperament made him 
averse to activity of any kind, and his administration is a period of 
lethargy with no particularly notable features. In domestic affairs 
he returned to a great extent to the system of Louis XIV., and thus 
reversed the superficial reaction that had set in under the regency 
of Orleans. The finances were set in order, the expenses reduced 
by rigid economy, and public credit recovered from the shock which 
it had received, The only dispute which arose in France during 
his ministry was connected with religion. Fleury was a devoted 
adherent of the Jesuits, who regained their former supremacy. The 
persecution of the Jansenists was resumed, and in 1730 the king 
held a bed of justice to compel the Parliament of Paris to register 
the bull Unigenitus. The members protested against this com- 
pulsion, and when they were answered by an edict forbidding them 
to meddle with politics, they abdicated their functions. The 
government sent them into exile, and for a time there was no 
supreme court of justice. At last they were recalled, but the 
squabble lingered on for several years. In foreign politics Fleury 
was pre-eminently a peace minister. He took affairs as they came 
and made no attempt to direct their course. Yet it is as a foreign 
minister that he has acquired such fame as attaches to him, but 
the record of his activity is to be sought not in the history of 
France, but in that of the states with which he was brought into 
contact. 


304 MODERN EUROPE. 


CHAPTER XVI. 


THE REIGN OF THE EMPEROR CHARLES V1. 


§ 1. Charles VI.’s attachment to Spain. § 2. War between Venice and 
the Porte; Austria joins Venice; victories of Eugene; peace of 
Passarowitz. § 3. Charles VI. and Spain; congress of Cambray. 

4, Succession to the Hapsburg territories; the Pragmatic Sanction. 
§ 5. The Netherlands; formation of the Ostend Company ; irritation 
of England and Holland. § 6. Philip V.’s abdication and return; 
Ripperda and his schemes. § 7. Alliance of Vienna; League of 
Hanover; Prussia gained over to Austria. § 8. Disgrace of Ripperda ; 
siege of Gibraltar; general war averted. § 9. Congress of Soissons ; 
treaty of Seville; second treaty of Vienna; Don Carlos obtains Parma 
and Piacenza. § 10. The European powers and the Pragmatic 
Sanction; succession question in Poland; election of Stanislaus 
Leczinski; his fall; accession of Augustus III. § 11. France allied 
with Spain and Sardinia by the league of Turin; campaigns of 1733, 
1734 and 1735; treaty of peace; Lorraine under Stanislaus Leczinski. 
§ 12. Death of Eugene; Bartenstein, § 13. Austria involved in the 
Russo-Turkish war; ill-success of the Austrian troops; treaty of 
Belgrad. § 14. Relations with Prussia; secret treaty with France; 
death of Charles VI. 


§ 1. THE conclusion of the treaties of Utrecht and Rastadt destroyed 
Charles VI.’s last chance of making good his claim to the Spanish 
crown. It was with undisguised reluctance that he recognised this. 
He had conceived the greatest affection for Spain, and especially 
for Catalonia, the province which had shown such signal and such 
ill-requited devotion to his cause. This feeling led him to shower 
favours upon the Spaniards who had accompanied him on his return 
to Vienna. He went so far as to form a separate ministerial de- 
partment, called the Spanish Council, in which Spanish and not 
German was the official language. As he had never acknowledged 
Philip V. nor made peace with Spain, it was probable that he would 
seize the first opportunity that might offer to re-assert his claims, 
in spite of the expressed will of Europe. The result was the 
formation of a German party at court, which counterbalanced the 
influence of the Spaniards, and which was unwilling to allow the 
interests of Austria to be sacrificed for the acquisition of a distant 


! 


mt 


A.D. 1714-1716. TURKISH WAR. 305 


kingdom in the west. At its head stood the greatest general of his 
age, Prince Eugene of Savoy. It was perhaps.fortunate for this 
party that events occurred in eastern Europe which at a critical 
time diverted Charles’ attention from his ambitious and impossible 
dreams. . 

§ 2. For ten years after the treaty of Carlowitz the Turks had 
remained sullenly acquiescent in the losses which they had sus- 
tained. The urgent representations of Louis XIV. and of the 
Hungarian rebel Ragocsky had failed to induce them to embark 
in anew war with the empire. But the residence at Bender of 
Charles XII. of Sweden, though it had availed little for his own 
interests, succeeded at least in reviving the military activity of the 
Porte. By the treaty of the Pruth the Russian conquest of Azof 
had been recovered. This success encouraged the hope of repairing 
the other losses that had been incurred in the former war. There 
were two states which had aggrandised themselves at Turkish 
expense, Austria and Venice. Of these the republic was far the less 
formidable and was naturally chosen as the first object of attack. 
A pretext was found in the protection which Venice had given to 
some Montenegrin fugitives, and in December, 1714, the Porte 
declared war. Venice was entirely unprepared, and moreover had - 
failed to acquire popularity amongst her Greek subjects. In 1715 
the grand vizier, Ali Cumurgi, landed in the Morea, and by the end 
of the year was master of the whole peninsula. Sailing thence he 
captured Suda and Spinalonga, the two last fortresses that Venice 
had been allowed to retain in Crete. 

The republic naturally appealed to her old ally, Austria, which 
had guaranteed her possessions by the treaty of Carlowitz. The 
advice of Eugene decided the Viennese government to renew the 
offensive and defensive alliance, and to call upon the Porte to observe 
its treaty obligations. As the Turk refused to give any satisfac- 
tion, war was inevitable. ‘he intervention of Austria saved Venice 
from ruin. The grand vizier and the main body of the Turkish 
army had to be employed in Hungary. Still a considerable army 
and fleet was sent to attack Corfu. ‘The Venetian troops were 
commanded by count Schulenburg, who had won a great reputation 
in the northern war, and whose services had been procured for the 
republic by Eugene. A heroic defence ended successfully, and in 
August, 1716, the Turks were compelled to raise the siege. “It 
was the last glorious military exploit in the annals of the republic, 
and it was achieved by a German mercenary soldier.” 

Meanwhile the vizier, with an army of 150,000 men, had laid 
siege to Peterwardein, the most important of the Austrian border- 
fortresses in Hungary. Underneath the walls Eugene forced on 

es EE 


306 MODERN EUROPE. Cuap. ti 


a battle which lasted five hours and ended in the vizier’s death 
and the complete victory of the Christians (August 5, 1716), 
Kugene followed up his success by besieging Temesvar, the last of 
the Ottoman possessions in Hungary, which had to surrender after a 
stubborn defence of two months. ‘The winter was occupied in 
fruitless attempts at mediation on the part of the maritime powers. 
In 1717 Eugene recommenced the campaign with a large army, 
including volunteers whom his reputation attracted from all parts 
of Europe. His object was the reduction of the famous fortress of 
Belgrad, which had been for a century and a half the strongest 
bulwark of the Turkish power on the Danube. The new vizier, Chilil 
Pasha, advanced to its relief, and on the 16th of August, Eugene 
fought the battle of Belgrad, the most glorious of all his victories: 
At one moment the day seemed lost, but his consummate generalship 
averted the disaster, the Turkish army was scattered to the winds, 
and only a small remnant escaped with the vizier to Nissa. On 
the next day the garrison surrendered Belgrad. Eugene now 
occupied Orsowa, and led his troops into winter quarters at Semlin. 
The Porte was compelled by these disasters to seek for peace and 
to accept the proffered mediation of England and Holland. A 
conference was opened in the Servian village of Passarowitz. The 
difficulty of the negotiations lay in the conflicting interests of the 
two allies. Austria was content with the status quo, but Venice 
wished to recover the Morea which it was unable to reconquer. The 
emperor was at first inclined to insist upon extreme demands which 
might have compelled a prolongation of the war. But the Spanish 
occupation of Sardinia and the threatened attack upon Sicily com- 
pelled him to be moderate, and in July, 1718, the treaty of Passarowitz 
was signed. Austria retained all its conquests, thus completing its 
possession of Hungary by acquiring the. Banat of Temesvar, and 
adding to it Belgrad and a strip of Servia. The Turks on their 
side kept the Morea, while Venice was confirmed in its possession of 
Corfu and Santa Maura together with the conquests which it had 
made in 1717 in Albania and Dalmatia. The Porte engaged to 
render no assistance to the Hungarian leader Francis Ragoesky, 
whom the Sultan had recently invited to Turkey, and who now 
received a residence in Asia Minor, where he remained till his death, 
in 1736. The treaty of Passarowitz is an object of legitimate 
satisfaction to the Austrian historians, but it is doubtful whether 
their country’s interests might not have been better served by the 
complete reduction of European Turkey, even if it had involved the 
loss of Sicily and Sardinia. 
§ 8. The peace with the Turks set the emperor_free to cope with 
the ambitious schemes of Alberoni, which have been described in the 


A.D. 1716-1724. THE PRAGMATIC SANCTION. 307 


last chaper. With the help of the Quadruple Alliance, he was able 
to overthrow the formidable minister, to recover Sicily; and to add 
that island to his territories by handing over Sardinia to the duke' of 
Savoy. There were still several unsettled disputes between Spain 
and Austria. Charles VI. had not laid down the title of king of 
Spain, and he claimed the grandmastership of the order of the 
Golden Fleece as the direct descendant of its founders, the dukes of 
Burgundy. These and other points were referred to a congress 
which was to meet at Cambray under the mediation of England 
and France. But it was soon evident that a decision would not be 
arrived at by the ordinary methods of European diplomacy. The 
mediating powers were hardly sincere in their efforts; and England 
especially was concerned more in advancing its commercial interests 
and justifying its retention of Gibraltar, than in anything else. 
Two years were wasted in disputes about precedence and etiquette, 
and it was not till 1724 that the congress of Cambray began its 
work, and even then it devoted itself to other matters than the 
reconciliation of Austria and Spain. 

§ 4. The treaty of Passarowitz and the accession of Spain to the 
Quadruple Alliance mark the zenith of Charles VI.’s power. For a 
whole generation, ever since 1683, Austria had been absorbed in 
almost incessant wars in which, thanks principally to Prince 
Eugene, it had reaped a full share of military, glory. But from this 
time a period of decline sets in. Military activity is superseded by 
diplomacy, always confused and often wearisome. There is one 
central point round which it is possible to group the ever changing 
relations of Europe, viz., the constant effort of Charles to procure the 
confirmation of his favourite Pragmatic Sanction. 

The succession to the Hapsburg territories had always been a 
source of dispute. Rudolf, the founder of the house in the 13th 
century, had declared his possessions indivisible. But his descend- 
ants had departed from this wise rule, and had resorted to the 
practice of subdivision. Even after the various provinces had been 
re-united under Maximilian I., they had been again divided 
among the children of Ferdinand I. Matters had been rendered 
worse by the fact that Hungary always, and Bohemia at times, 
claimed the right of electing their king. Successive rulers had 
found it necessary to settle the succession during their lifetime. 
The latest arrangement of the kind had been made in 1703° by 
Leopold I., when he and his elder son Joseph renounced their 
claims on the Spanish crown in favour of the archduke Charles. 
This was accompanied by a pactwm mutuce successionis, by which 
Joseph and Leopold were to inherit Spain if Charles died childless, 
and the succession in Austria was thus ‘settled: (1) Joseph and 


308 MODERN EUROPE. Guar. xvi. 


his male heirs; (2) Charles and his male heirs; (3) Joseph’s 
daughters ; and their descendants; (4) Charles’ daughters. 


In 1711 Joseph I. died leaving two daughters, Maria Amelia and 
Maria Josepha, and the Austrian territories fell to Charles VI.- 


From the first he seems to have turned his attention to the 
succession question, and in 1713 he brought before the council a 
document, which is known as the Pragmatic Sanction. It contained 
three articles: (1) The Austrian states are one and indivisible; 
(2) Males of the house of Hapsburg are to succeed in order of 
primogeniture ; (3) In default of male heirs, the succession is to go 
first to the daughters of Charles VI., then to those of Joseph I., and 
lastly to those of Leopold I. It was this last article which was at 
complete variance with the agreement of 1703. But the council 
had no right of remonstrance, and the decree was accepted, though 
as yet it was not made public. 

In 1718 Charles VI., who had married the beautiful Elizabeth 
Christina of Brunswick, was still childless. It was not till 1716 
that a son, Leopold, was born, whose life would have removed all 
difficulties, but he died in a few months. In 1717 the empress 
gave birth to a daughter, the famous Maria Theresa, and in the 
next year to another daughter. By 1720 the prospect of male 
descendants had become so distant as to be almost hopeless, and 
now Charles produced the Pragmatic Sanction and set himself to 
obtain its confirmation from the estates of the subject provinces. 
One after another they were induced to give their consent with 
more or less readiness; first Austria and Silesia in 1720, then 
Hungary and Transyivania, and lastly Bohemia and the Nether- 
lands. In 1724 a grand assembly was held at Vienna, to which all 
the provinces sent deputies, and the Pragmatic Sanction was formally 
proclaimed as an irrevocable law. The daughters of Joseph I. were 
compelled on their marriage to renounce all claims to the succession, 
and their husbands had to accept the renunciation. From this 
time Charles made it the grand and almost the sole object of his 
foreign policy to induce all the powers of Europe to guarantee the 
succession of his eldest daughter, Maria Theresa. It was in vain 
that his ministers lamented the sacrifice of Austrian interests, and 
that Eugene maintained that the succession would be better 
guaranteed by an efficient army and a well-filled treasury than by 
any number of hollow and interested promises. 

§ 5. Besides the settlement of the succession, there was one other 
matter in which Charles VI. took a great personal interest. In 
point of territories he was one of the most powerful princes in 
Kurope. He had inherited Austria, Styria, Carinthia, Silesia, 
Bohemia with Moravia, Hungary and Transylvania, Tyrol and the 


pie: 


A.D. 1720~172+4. THE OSTEND COMPANY. 309 


Breisgau. To them he had added, by the treaty of Rastadt, 
Naples, Milan, and the Netherlands; by the treaty of Passarowitz, 
Temesvar, Belgrade and northern Servia; and by the Quadruple 
Alliance, Sicily. But there was one great defect in his power which 
had always hampered the Austrian Hapsburgs. The revenue only 
amounted to 30 millions of gulden, a sum entirely disproportionate 
to the extent of his territories and the number of his subjects. To 
increase his revenue was naturally an object that lay very close to 
the emperor’s heart. Not unnaturally he turned for this purpose 
to his recent acquisition, the Netherlands, which had once enjoyed 
the most flourishing commerce in the world, and which had been 
the chief source of wealth to the Spanish Hapsburgs. But since 
the war of independence the prosperity of the Netherlands had 
immensely declined. Dutch jealousy had insisted, in the treaty of 
Westphalia, on the closing of the Scheldt, and the trade of Antwerp 
nad passed to Amsterdam. Charles VI. determined to revive 
Flemish commerce as a means of at once filling his own coffers and 
conciliating his subjects, who had substantial grounds for complaint 
in the way they had been transferred to Austria without any 
pretence of consulting their wishes, and in the barrier-treaty which 
had handed over their chief fortresses to the hated Dutch. 

_ Prince Eugene had been appointed governor of the Netherlands 
in 1716, and although the Turkish war and the necessity of making 
head against the Spanish party at Vienna prevented him from 
fulfilling his duties in person, he was anxious to do what he could 
for the province which had been entrusted to him. He therefore 
seconded the emperor’s wishes, though he tried to restrain him from 
measures which would excite the jealousy of England and Holland. 
The re-opening of the Scheldt was too extreme a measure to be 
ventured upon, but there was an alternative port to Antwerp in 
Ostend. The merchants of Ostend were encouraged to undertake a 
trade with India on their own account, and in 1717 several ships 
made the voyage with great profit. But the Dutch were on the 
alert to preserve their monopoly, and did not hesitate to use force 
against the rival traders. Charles was indignant at the insult, but 
did not venture to risk a rupture as the complaints of Holland were 
reiterated by England. He determined however to carry out his 
schemes in defiance of the maritime powers. In 1722 he founded 
an East Indian Company at Ostend under direct imperial patronaze. 
Its capital was fixed at six million gulden in 6000 shares of 1000 
gulden each. Foreigners were allowed to purchase shares but were 
excluded from the meetings of shareholders. The company was-to 
have an independent administration, and was authorised to carry 
the imperial arms and flag. In return for these concessions it was 


{ 


310 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. xvI. 


to pay six per cent. on its profits to the imperial treasury. The 
company was speedily formed, and in a few months the shares had 
all been taken up. , 

Before the treaty of Westphalia, European wars and diplomacy 
had mainly been directed by religious differences. _But from that 
time to the French Revolution religion was superseded by com- 
mercial rivalry. This was one of the results of the so-called 
“mercantile system.” International trade was regarded in those 
days not as a bargain which was profitable to both parties concerned, 
but as a contest in which one gained and the other lost. Hence 
the frequent war of tariffs and repressive duties which often did 
much more harm to the resources of both states than open hostilities 
could have done. It was commercial rivalry which had caused the 
English wars against Holland under Cromwell and Charles Il. ; it 
was the measures taken against a tariff of Colbert’s that induced 
Louis XIV. to make war on the Dutch in 1672; and commercial 
interests were at the bottom of the war of the Spanish Succession. 
So now the formation of the Ostend Company put an end for a time 
to the long alliance between Austria and England which had been 
formed in opposition to the House of Bourbon, and which had been 
confirmed by the accession of the House of Hanover to the English 
throne. England was determined to suppress the company at all 
costs, and Charles VI. was resolute to defend it. The anger raised 
by the English pretensions to a commercial monopoly naturally 
brought Austria closer to Spain, which had many similar grounds 
for complaint, and thus facilitated the conclusion of an agreement 
which the congress of Cambray had hitherto found it impossible to 
effect. 

§ 6. In spite of the disasters which led to the fall of Alberoni, 
Philip V. of Spain and his wife Elizabeth of Parma still clung to 
their schemes of obtaining an Italian principality for their sons, and 
of securing the eventual succession to the throne of France. In 1724 
Europe was astounded by the news that Philip had abdicated in 
favour of his eldest son Don Luis, and had gone into retirement at 
St. Ildefonso. The real motive lay, not in weariness of the world, 
but in a desire to remove all obstacles in the way of his accession 
in France, where Louis XV. was expected to die before long. But 
the move was not successful, Louis XV. lived, and the queen 
soon wearied of her retirement. Luckily for her, Luis died eight 
months after his accession. ‘To the surprise of the world, and not 
altogether to the satisfaction of his subjects, Philip V.+left his 
retreat to resume the crown which he had laid down of his own 
accord. . 

At this time the chief influence over:the queen was exercised by 


A.D. 1724-1725. RIPPERDA. 311 


another of those foreign adventurers who at this time found in 
Spain a ready market for their talents. Ripperda was a native of 
Groningen, who rose to prominence in the service of Holland, and 
after the treaty of Utrecht was sent as Dutch minister to Madrid. 
Foreseeing the possibility of advancement in Spain he resigned his 
office, became a naturalised Spaniard, and rendered considerable 
service to Alberoni in matters of trade and finance, of which he 
had a real knowledge. Having incurred the displeasure of the 
minister, Ripperda had to leave Spain, for a time. In Germany he 
came into contact with prince Eugene, who gave him a pension, and 
it is possible that his later conduct was dictated to him from 
Vienna. On the fall of Alberoni he returned to Spain and won the 
favour of the king by changing his religion, and of the queen by the 
readiness with which he fell in with her favourite plans. The 
one creditable motive which can be assigned to him was the desire 
to restore the commercial prosperity of Spain by annihilating the 
maritime power of England. He persuaded the queen that the best 
chance not only of acquiring a principality in Italy for Don Carlos, 
but also of regaining Gibraltar, lay in breaking altogether with Eng- 
land and France and in a close alliance with the emperor. Accord- 
ingly, at the end of 1724 he was sent to Vienna, which he entered 
incognito as Baron Pfaffeuburg, and held secret conferences with 
the minister Sinzendorf. 

§ 7. While he was in Vienna a great impulse was given to the 
negotiations by the sudden dismissal of the Spanish infanta from 
France and the marriage of Louis XV. to Marie Leczinska. This 
insult caused the bitterest indignation in the minds of Philip and 
Elizabeth, and disposed them to use any possible means of obtain- 
ing revenge. ‘lhe emperor being at this time at enmity with 
England on account of the Ostend Company, and being also anxious 
to obtain from Spain the confirmation of the Pragmatic Sanction, 
Ripperda had little difficulty in arranging terms, and the work 
which the congress of Cambray had found impossible was completed 
in afew days. On the 30th of April, 1725, the alliance of Vienna 
was concluded. Charles Vi. renounced his claim to the Spanish 
crown, while Philip made a similar renunciation of Naples, Sicily, 
Milan, and the Netherlands. The succession to the duchies of 
Parma and Tuscany was promised to Don Carlos, the eldest son of 
Philip and Elizabeth. Spain undertook to guarantee the Prag- 
matic Sanction, and the emperor pledged himself to use his influence 
with England to obtain the cession of Gibraltar and Minorca. On 
the Ist of May a commercial treaty was-drawn up, by which Philip 
sanctioned the Ostend Company and opened the Spanish ports to it, 
and, to conciliate the empire,-he promised to transfer to the Germans 


B12 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. XVI. 


the commercial privileges in Spain which had hitherto been enjoyed 
by England and Holland. Besides these two public treaties there 
was a third, which was to be kept perfectly secret, and the con- 
ditions of which were only made known precisely by the revelations 
of Ripperda. By this the emperor pledged himself to aid Spain, 
if necessary by force, to recover Gibraltar, and in the event of 
George I. proving obstinate, to assist the Jacobites in deposing the 
Hanoverian dynasty. There was also an arrangement, although it 
was doubtful how far the emperor committed himself to it, that 
Maria Theresa and one of her sisters should be married to two of 
the sons of Philip V. This close alliance with Spain was made in 
direct opposition to the advice of Eugene, who was anxious to 
avoid so complete and open a breach with England. 

So sudden a reconciliation between such old enemies as the 
Hapsburgs and the Spanish Bourbons naturally caused great 
excitement in Europe, but need not have inspired alarm if the last 
treaty had been kept sufliciently secret. But the indiscreet vanity 
of Ripperda led him to boast of the great results which he had 
achieved, and the English and French envoys were soon able to 
transmit sufficiently accurate information to their respective govern- 
ments. The English ministers were thrown into consternation by 
the news, and France was also threatened, though less directly, and 
moreover was unable to allow the possible union of Austria and 
Spain by the marriage of Maria Theresa and Philip’s son. Accord- 
ingly the two powers formed the opposition league of Hanover in 
September, 1725. Frederick William of Prussia also joined the 
league, though not immediately interested, partly because he had 
several grounds of quarrel with the emperor, and partly in the 
hope of obtaining Jiilich and Berg from the Palatine house of 
Neuburg. Europe was divided into two hostile leagues, each of 
which endeavoured to obtain as many allies as possible. Jealousy 
of the Ostend Company induced Holland, and the prospect ot 
English subsidies induced Denmark and Sweden to join the league 
of Hanover. ‘The emperor, on his side, gained over several of the 
south German princes and also Catharine I. of Russia, who had 
succeeded to Peter the Great’s dislike of Hanover. A still greater 
success was the separation of Prussia from the side of his enemies 
by the treaty of Wusterhausen (Oct. 1726). 

§ 8. Meanwhile Ripperda, the author of all this turmoil, had fallen 
into disgrace. On his return to Madrid he was received with the 
greatest honours, raised to the rank of duke, and appointed minister 
of foreign affairs. This sudden advancement seems to have turned 
his head. Hitherto he had shown real ability for business, 
henceforth he was conspicuous only for vanity and overweening 


A.D. 1725-1726. RIPPERDA’S FALL. 313 


presumption. He openly threatened to drive the kings of England 


and Prussia from their thrones. It soon became evident that he had 
deceived others as well as himself. The arrival at Madrid of an 
Austrian envoy, Koénigsegg, convinced the queen that little had 
really been gained by the treaty of Vienna. Instead of bringing 
troops, the envoy only demanded money, which Ripperda had 
boastfully promised, but of which Spain had but a scanty supply. 
To raise supplies he resorted to extortion, debasement of the 
coinage, and other extreme measures, which increased his already 
great unpopularity among the native Spaniards. ‘The emperor also 
showed no great readiness to conclude the projected marriage of the 
archduchess, and excused himself on the ground that it excited 
great discontent among the German princes. The queen was the 
last to give up her belief in the minister who had promised her so 
much. At last, however, Ripperda received a notice of dismissal 
from office in May, 1726. In childish terror he sought refuge in 
the house of the English minister Stanho;e, to whom he disclosed 
all the secrets of the cabinet. I‘nraged at this conduct Philip 
imprisoned him in the castle of Segovia, but after fifteen months 
he made his escape to England, and thence to Morocco, where he 
entered the service of the emperor, became a Mohammedan, and 
died in 17387. He has naturally been compared with Alberoni, 
whom he rivalled in ability, especially for domestic government, 
but to whom he was infinitely inferior in the essentials of character 
and conduct. 

Ripperda’s policy was continued by his successor, Don Joseph 
Patino, who adhered to the Austrian alliance and dispatched a 
fleet to lay siege to Gibraltar. A general European war seemed 
to be inevitable. Charles VI. set himself to increase his army aud 
to form the rudiments of a navy. [France collected troops on the 
Spanish frontiers. The English parliament was roused by the 
projected intervention in favour of the Jacobites and by the pros- 
pect of losing Gibraltar to vote lavish subsidies. The army was 
strengthened, and a fleet sent to attack the Spanish galleons at Porto 
Bello. 

-In spite of all these warlike preparations the war came to nothing. 
The chief causes of this were: (1) the pacific tendencies of Walpole 
in England and of Fleury in France; and (2) the growing coolness 
between the emperor and Spain. The alliance of Vienna was 
essentially unnatural and could not last. It would have. been 
impossible to marry Maria Theresa to a Spanish prince, even if 
she had not been destined for Francis Joseph of Lorraine. Moreover; 
the prospect of the erection of a Spanish duchy in the centre of Italy 
was extremely distasteful to the emperor. Other causes combined 

15* 


314 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. XVI. 


to incline Charles to peace. The king of Prussia, though he had 
deserted the Hanoverian alliance, was not really anxious to support 
the emperor, and maintained an obstinate neutrality. And the 
death of Catharine of Russia deprived the league of Vienna of its 
one powerful supporter. Accordingly, in May, 1727, while the siege 
of Gibraltar was proceeding, Charles threw over his obligations to 
Spain and signed the preliminaries of a peace with England, France 
and Holland. The Ostend Company was to be suspended for seven 
years, and all other questions were referred to a European Congress 
at Aachen, which was afterwards, for the convenience of Fleury, 
transferred to Soissons. Spain hesitated for some time to accept 
this arrangement, and was encouraged in the delay by the death of 
George I. But when it was seen that George II.’s accession made 
no difference in the attitude of England, and that Walpole’s power 
was unshaken, Philip was unable to hold out any longer, and in 
March, 1728, signed the convention of the Pardo. 

§ 9. The congress met at Soissons, but proved as ineffective and 
useless as the previous assembly at Cambray. The emperor, 
anxious to gain the assent of England and France to the Pragmatic 
Sanction, severed himself altogether from Spain and made no pre- 
tence of supporting her demand for Gibraltar. Philip V. was 
now almost imbecile and his wife was practically absolute. The 
attitude of Charles VI. induced her to give up all hopes of obtaining 
her ends with the help of Austria. The birth of ason to Louis XV. 
in 1729, destroyed all prospect of the Spanish Bourbons acquiring 
the French crown, and made her more anxious than ever to obtain — 
an Italian principality for her son. or this purpose she determined 
to throw herself into the arms of France and England, and in 
November, 1729, she accepted the treaty of Seville. Spain, England 
and France concluded an offensive and defensive alliance, which 
was immediately afterwards joined by Holland. No mention was 
made of Gibraltar and Minorca, which were virtually resigned by 
Spain. The commercial privileges accorded by the treaty of Vienna 
to the Ostend Company and the emperor’s subjects were revoked. 
Don Carlos was to succeed to the duchies of Parma and Tuscany, 
and to secure his rights those provinces were to be occupied by 
6000 Spanish troops. 

The news of the treaty of Seville excited the greatest indigna- 
tion in the mind of Charles VI., who saw himself completely 
duped. He collected an army of 80,000 men in Italy to oppose 
the threatened occupation of the Italian duchies, and when the 
old duke of Parma died in January, 1731, he seized upon his 
territory as a fief of the empire. Elizabeth called upon her allies 
to enforce the treaty, but neither France nor England was willing 


| 


acv. 1727-1732. TREATY OF VIENNA. 315 


to make war. But there was one bribe which could overcome the 
emperor’s opposition. Walpole determined to act independently of 
France, and opened a separate negotiation with the Austrian 
government. In March, 1731, the second treaty of Vienna was 
concluded. On condition that England should guarantee the 
Pragmatic Sanction, Charles agreed to dissolve the Ostend 
Company and to confirm the treaty of Seville. In 1732, Don 
Carlos and the Spanish troops were conveyed to Italy in English 
ships, and took possession of Parma and Piacenza with the 
emperor’s sanction. At the same time the aged duke of Tuscany 
acknowledged the Spanish prince as his heir. ‘Thus the long and 
tedious series of disputes and agreements came to an end, and 
Kurope seemed likely to enjoy peace for a time. 

§ 10. The temporary settlement of Italian affairs enabled Charles 
VI. to turn his whole attention once more to the Pragmatic 
Sanction. ‘lhe first European power to undertake its guarantee had 
been Spain in1725. Russia had followed in 1726, and now in 17381 
England and Holland were pledged to the same effect. France 
was resolute in its refusal to agree to the emperor’s scheme, and 
even intrigued in the other European courts to obtain its rejection. 
It was of especial importance to Charles to gain over the German 
princes, of whom only one, the king of Prussia, had as yet given his 
consent, on condition that his claims upon Jiilich and Berg should 
be acknowledged. In January, 1732, a diet met at Ratisbon, and 
the Pragmatic Sanction was formally accepted by all its members 
except the three electors of Saxony, Bavaria, and the Palatinate. 
The two former had themselves some claims on the Austrian 
succession and hoped to obtain at least a share on Charles’ death. 
The elector palatine was alienated by the prospect of Prussia 
acquiring J iilich and Berg. 

As Augustus of Saxony. was determined in his refusals to 
recognise the Pragmatic Sanction, the emperor on his side opposed 
the elector’s favourite scheme of making the Polish crown heredi- 
tary in his family by procuring the succession of his son, another 
Augustus. The other prominent candidate was the deposed 
Stanislaus Leczinski, the former protégé of Charles XII., who had 
recently regained importance as the father-in-law of Louis XY. 
The prospect’ of the establishment of French influence in Poland . 
was very distasteful to the northern powers, who were already 
looking forward to a partition of that kingdom. Accordingly a 
treaty was projected between Austria, Russia and Prussia, by 
which they agreed to exclude both the Saxon claimant and Leczinski, 
and to give the Polish crown to Emanuel prince of Portugal. But 
before the treaty was signed,-Augustus of Saxony and Poland died 


316 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. xvz. 


in February, 1733. The vacancy in this remote, and on account of 
its constitution powerless, kingdom was destined to involve Europe 
in an almost universal war. 

In Poland there was a strong feeling that the foreign rulers had 
brought nothing but disasters on the country, and that a native 
should be elected. This was much in favour of Leczinski, but he 
had little chance of being chosen unless }*rance would espouse his 
cause. Fleury was as usual averse to war, and protested against 
the idea of ruining France for the sake of the king’s father-in-law. 
He was not very well disposed to Marie Leczinska, whose marriage 
had been the work of the duke of Bourbon, and besides Louis XV. 
was not devotedly attached to his wife. But the same qualities 
which inclined Fleury to a policy of peace rendered him incapable 
of resisting the pressure of the strong war party in I'rance. This 
was composed partly of the surviving veterans of Louis XIV.’s 
reign, such as Villars and Berwick, and partly of the young 
courtiers who had never seen a war and were anxious for the 
opportunity of distinguishing themselves. Their representations 
forced the king and minister to promise assistance to Stanislaus, 
who made his way in disguise to Warsaw and was there elected 
king by a majority of the Polish nobles. 

This event caused great excitement in northern Europe. Russia 
was determined not to tolerate the restoration in Poland of a king 
whom Peter the Great had expelled. The empress Anne, who had 
recently freed herself from the aristocratic restrictions imposed at 
her accession, made an alliance with the young Augustus of Saxony 
and sent an army to support him. ‘The emperor was induced to 
take the same side when Augustus undertook to guarantee the 
Pragmatic Sanction. Austrian troops were massed in Silesia on 
the Polish frontier, but were never employed, as the Russians and 
Saxons were quite able to do the work by themselves. Leczinski 
was driven from Warsaw and took refuge in Danzig, where he 
impatiently waited for the promised succour from France. But 
Fleury, though he had committed himself to the war, was not 
prepared to pursue it with energy. le feared lest the despatch of 
a French fleet to the Baltic might offend the susceptibilities of 
England, and moreover he saw an easier way of benefiting France 
in the south than in the north of Europe. Only 16,000 men came 
to the assistance of Stanislaus, and in spite of the heroism which 
they displayed, they were unable to force an entrance into Danzig. 
The result of this disappointment was that Danzig had to surrender 
to the Russians, and the Poles had nothing left but to acknowledge 
Augustus III. as king. Stanislaus escaped into Prussia, where he 
was hospitably received by Frederick William, who had remained 


A.D. 1733. WAR OF THE POLISH SUCCESSION. 317 


neutral during the war, and who refused to give up the fugitive on 
the demand of the emperor. 

§ 11. It would have been well for Charles VI. if he had imitated 
the prudent policy of Prussia and not committed himself to-either side. 
The accession of Augustus was effected without his intervention, 
which brought him no advantage beyond the Saxon confirmation of 
the Pragmatic Sanction, while on the other hand it involved him 
in a disastrous war with France. It is probable that he was misled 
by excessive confidence in the pacific tendencies of Fleury, but never- 
theless, his conduct in the Polish succession is the most con- 
spicuous illustration of the evils that were brought upon Austria 
by Charles’ insane desire to have his daughter’s succession 
universally guaranteed. 

Fleury had displayed no very keen desire to maintain Stanislaus 
Leczinski on the Polish throne, but he showed great ingenuity 
in using the pretext for war to obtain other ends. Italy was to be 
freed from the Hapsburg supremacy, and instead of being united to 
any single great power was to be divided into small principalities, 
which would serve the purposes of France. At the same time there 
was a possibility of obtaining a direct advantage to France in the 
direction of Lorraine, an imperial fief which was almost surrounded 
by French territories and had often been occupied by French 
arms, but had as yet escaped annexation. The province was of 
greater importance than ever at the present moment, because the 
duke Francis was betrothed to Maria ‘Theresa, and her accession 


‘in Austria would bring the Hapsburg power inconveniently near to 


the French frontier. 

For these purposes Fleury sought and obtained the alliance of 
Spain and Sardinia. Elizabeth of Spain was far from being satisfied 
with what she had gained by the treaty of Vienna. It was true 
that Don Carlos was established in Parma and had been recognised 
as heir to the duke of Tuscany. But the emperor had taken no 
pains to discuise his dissatisfaction with the arrangement, and had 
protested against the homage done by the Tuscan estates as being 
null without the imperial consent. ‘The queen readily grasped at 
the opportunity of increasing the power of her family in Italy by 
renewing the alliance between the two branches of the house of 
Bourbon. Savoy and Sardinia were ruled by Charles Emanuel, 
who had come to the throne on the abdication of his father Victor 
Amadeus. Charles Emanuel inherited that eager desire for 
territorial aggrandisement which had characterised all his pre- 
decessors. ‘They had aimed, it was said, at eating up Lombardy 
leaf by leaf like an artichoke; he wished to swallow it at once. 
In September and October, 1733, the league of Turin was concluded 


318 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. XVI. 


between France, Spain, and Sardinia. Don Carlos was to renounce 
Parma and the succession to Tuscany in favour of his younger 
brother Don Philip, and was to acquire Naples and Sicily as a 
kingdom for himself. Both the kingdom and the duchies were to 
revert to Spain in case of the male line of their rulers becoming 
extinct. The king of Sardinia was to annex the Milanese to 
Piedmont, and thus to form a kingdom of Lombardy. When the 
conquest was completed, Savoy was to be handed over to France. 
No time was lost in commencing hostilities. Two French 
armies were collected. One under Berwick entered Lorraine, 
while the other under the aged Villars crossed the Alps to assist 
Charles Emanuel. Before the end of the year Lorraine had been 
overrun, and great part of the Milanese, including the capital, had 
been lost to the emperor. Charles VI. was entirely unprepared for 
this sudden attack, which his own imprudence had brought upon 
himself. He made urgent appeals for assistance to England, but 
Walpole resolutely refused to take part in the war. Then he 
turned to Germany, where the diet voted supplies, but the resolu- 
tion lost much of its importance through the open opposition of 
the three Wittelsbach electors of Bavaria, Cologne and the 
Palatinate. Worst of all, the great Austrian general, Eugene, was 
old and worn out, and there was no successor to take his place. 
The military operations of 1734 are devoid of interest and 
importance except as regards their results. On the Rhine Eugene 
undertook the command of a large imperial army to oppose Berwick, 
who had broken through the lines of Ettlingen. But Hugene 
displayed none of his old genius or energy, and was unable to 
prevent the French from capturing Philipsburg, although Berwick 
was killed during the siege. In northern Italy Villars had planned a 
triumphant campaign with the aid of Sardinia and Spain. But he 
was foiled by the conduct of his allies. Charles Emanuel refused 
to take part in operations in the open field and contented himself 
with a war of sieges. Don Carlos, intent on his enterprise in the 
south, had no particular interest in the aggrandisement of Sardinia. 
Villars resigned his command in disgust, and on his way back to 
France died at Turin (17 June, 1734), at the age of eighty-two, the 
last of the great generals of Louis XIV. The result of the campaign 
was that the Austrian general, Mercy, though defeated near Parma, 
was able to keep the strong fortress of Mantua and thus to maintain 
his hold upon eastern Lombardy. More decisive results were achieved 
in the south. Don Carlos entered Naples with a small army and 
was welcomed by the inhabitants, who disliked the German govern- 
ment, and who preferred to be ruled by a resident king rather than 
by a viceroy. The imperial forces had been diminished for the 


A.D, 1734—1737. CONCLUSION OF PEACE. 319 


protection of the Milanese, and the remaining troops were crushed 
by the Spaniards at Bitonto. 

In 1735 the Spanish troops crossed into Sicily and reduced the 
island without any difficulty. In Lombardy Kénigsegg, who had 
succeeded Mercy, had to retire beyond the Adige. On the Rhine 
Eugene was again in command and was reinforced by auxiliaries 
from Russia. But nothing of any importance took place, and the 
chief powers, France and Austria, were absorbed not so much in 
the war as in negotiations. Walpole had offered to mediate, and 
Fleury, in constant fear lest England should desert her neutrality, 
was eager for peace. Charles VI. was naturally inclined the same 
way, partly by his losses in the war, partly by the desire to gain a 
new confirmation for the Pragmatic Sanction, and partly by the 
danger of a new Turkish war. On the 3rd of October, 1735, the 
preliminaries of a treaty between France and Austria were signed 
at Vienna. Stanislaus Leczinski renounced the Polish crown in 
favour of Augustus of Saxony, but was allowed to retain the title 
of king for his lifetime. As compensation he was to receive the 
duchy of Lorraine, which on his death was to pass into the hands 
of France. Francis of Lorraine, the destined son-in-law of 
Charles VI., was to receive 'uscany on the death of the last 
grand-duke of the house of Medici. Don Carlos was to be recognised 
as king of Naples and Sicily, his former duchy of Parma and 
Piacenza being handed over to the emperor. All other conquests 
made by the allies, including Lombardy, were to be restored, with 
the exception of Novara and Tortona, which were to be given to 
the king of Sardinia. 

It is evident that Fleury had given up the design of freeing Italy 
from the Hapsburgs. Not only did the emperor recover Lombardy, 
but he added to it Parma and Piacenza, and his son-in-law in 1737 
obtained Tuscany. ‘lhus by resigning the distant provinces in the 
south, he gained a compact territory in northern and central Italy. 
The great advantage to France, which has given Fleury a dis- 
tinguished place among Trench ministers, was the arrangement 
about Lorraine. Stanislaus took possession of the duchy in 1737, 
aod at last obtained an opportunity for displaying his really 
eminent qualities as aruler. After a beneficent administration of 
twenty-nine years he died in 1766, and Lorraine was absorbed in 
France. It had been so long practically separated from Germany, 
that its loss, though resented, was not much felt, while it was of 
considerable importance to the French as rounding off their frontiers. 
It was the last of the great accessions of territory. which the 
country owed to its Bourbon rulers. Elizabeth of Spain was 
bitterly discontented at the proposed terms, and especially at the 


320 MODERN -EUROPE. CHAP. xvi. 


loss of Parma and Tuscany. But she was powerless to continue tha 
war by herself, though she succeeded in postponing the conclusion 
of the definitive treaty till 1738. In this France undertook in the 
most explicit terms possible to guarantee the Pragmatic Sanction. 

§ 12. Austria had suffered serious losses of prestige if not of power 
in the war of the Polish succession; but she was destined to 
undergo still greater humiliations in the succeeding years. On the 
21st of April, 1736, Prince Eugene died at the age of seventy-two. 
His career is coincident with what is on the whole the most 
glorious period of Austrian history, since Charles V. had little 
direct connection with Austria. His claim to the affectionate and 
admiring recollection of the country which he served is to be 
measured by the collapse which followed his death. The most 
powerful man in Vienna was now Johann Christopher von 
Bartenstein. He was the son of a professor in Munich and had 
received his education at Paris. He came to Vienna in 1714, 
became a Roman Catholic, and entered the service of the govern- 
ment. Though he never held any higher office than that cf 
secretary to the cabinet, and was despised by contemporaries for 
his plebeian origin, he obtained complete supremacy over Charles VI., 
who placed unlimited confidence in his honesty and his devotion 
to the Hapsburg interests. Unfortunately these were his only 
recommendations. Bartenstein was before everything a jurist, 
with alla jurist’s love for pettifogging details, and filled with an 
unbounded belief in the cumbrous and obsolete constitution of the 
Holy Roman Empire. He had not the slightest pretensions to 
statesmanship, no insight into character, no powers of administra- 
tion. What he excelled in was. the drawing up of protocols and 
engagements with foreign powers. It was his influence to a great 
extent that induced the emperor to attach such exaggerated 
importance to the reiterated guarantees of the Pragmatic Sanction. 

§ 13. One of the most humiliating episodes of Austrian history is 
the Turkish war of 1737-9, in which Charles was involved by his 
alliance with Russia. That country had never ceased to desire the 
re-acquisition of Azof, the conquest of which had been the first 
achievement of Peter the Great, but which he had lost again by his 
disastrous campaign on the Pruthin1711. The Czarina Anne after 
the settlement of the Polish question seized the opportunity to 
declare war in 1736 against the Porte, which was at this time 
engaged in a contest with Persia. One army under Munnich 
entered the Crimea, broke through the lines of Perekop, and overran 
the peninsula, while another under Lascy recovered Azof. 

By the treaty with Catharine I., in 1726, Russia and Austria had 
pledged themselves to send 30,000 auxiliaries to each other in case 


A.D. 1736-1739. AUSTRO-TURKISH WAR. 321 


either were involved in war with the Turks. ‘This agreement had 
been confirmed in 1735 as the price of a Russian contingent to 
help Eugene on the Rhine. Anne now called upon the emperor 
to fulfil his engagement. If he had been content with sending the 
380,000 men no great harm would have been done. But the Russian 
successes of 1786 had created the impression that recent losses 
might be compensated by a war of conquest, and Charles and his 
advisers determined to commit Austria to the war, not as an 
auxiliary but as a principal. The command was entrusted to 
Seckendorf, whom Eugene had pointed out as his successor, but 
who laboured under the disadvantage of being a Protestant. On 
his arrival at the Hungarian frontier, Seckendorf found everything 
in the most deplorable condition, the troops were ill supplied, the 


_ fortresses had been neglected, the garrisons were insufficient. He 


wished to resign, but was induced to go on with the campaign. 
He succeeded in taking Nissa, the chief fortress which remained 
to the Turks in Servia. But two months afterwards the vizier 
arrived with overwhelming forces, forced the Austrians to retire, and 
recovered Nissa, so that the campaign ended without anything 
having been effected. The Jesuits maintained that no victory could 
be gained against the infidels es long as a heretic was allowed to 
command. Seckendorf was not only recalled but even thrown into 
prison. His successor in 1738, Kénigsegg, succeeded in forcing 
the Turks to raise the siege of Orsowa. But his success was only 
temporary, he was driven back to the walls of Belgrad. Orsowa and 
several other fortresses fell into the hands of the enemy. ‘The 
government at Vienna could think of no other resource than to 
treat failure as a crime and punish it by disgrace. Konigsegg 
was replaced by count Wallis, who proved even less successful than 
his predecessors. In the battle of Crocyka (July, 1759), the Turks 
won a complete victory and now threatened Belgrad, the greatest of 
Eugene’s conquests. These continued disasters impelled the 
emperor to desire peace. 

lf the military operations had been sufficiently discreditable and 
iJl-managed, the subsequent negotiations were still more so. Charles 


‘began by sending Wallis full powers to treat with the grand vizier. 


He had already commenced negotiations and had recognised the 
necessity of surrendering Belgrad, when Neipperg, a hostile officer, 
arrived with independent powers from the emperor. Neipperg was 
imprisoned by the vizier for maintaining that he had no authority 
to grant the cession of Belgrad which had already been arranged 
by Wallis. However, he was released on the intercession of the 
French envoy, Villeneuve, who now undertook to mediate between 
the two powers. On the Ist of September the treaty of Belgrad was 


322 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. XVI 


drawn up, perhaps the most humiliating treaty that Austria ever 
concluded. Belgrad and Orsowa were surrendered, together with 
all the territories acquired by the treaty of Passarowitz, with the 
exception of Iemesvar. Meanwhile the Russians, though they 
had won no great successes, had at any rate held their own. But 
the secession of Austria compelled the termination of the war, and 
on the 18th of September peace was also arranged between Russia 
and the Porte. All the Russian conquests were restored except 
Azof, and its fortifications were to be dismantled and the district 
laid waste. The Czarina had to promise not to maintain a single 
vessel on the Black Sea or on the sea of Azof, and to conduct all 
commerce with Turkey by Turkish vessels. Thus the sole gain 
of Russia from a war that had cost much treasure and more lives 
was the acquisition of a barren strip of useless land. 

§ 14. The treaty of Belgrad was mainly the work of Villeneuve, — 
who considered that he had rendered a service to France in exalting 
Turkey at the expense of Austria. Charles VI. felt the disgrace 
keenly and it threw a gloom over hisremaining days. His govern- 
ment was imprudent and incapable to the last. There was one 
power, Prussia, whom it was his most obvious policy to conciliate. 
Frederick William had been the first German prince to guarantee 
the Pragmatic Sanction, he was the best able to fulfil his promise, 
but at the same time he had the greatest temptations to break it. 
A weak and divided Austria would. at once give Prussia the 
supremacy inGermany. In spite of these considerations Charles did 
not scruple to alienate this prince without any particular motive. In 
1728, he had promised the king to secure his succession to the duchy 
of Berg. In January, 1739, a secret treaty was made at Versailles 
between France and Austria, by which, on the death of the elector 
palatine, provisional possession for two years of Jiilich and Berg was 
to be given to Karl Theodore of Sulzbach. This was intended to 
exclude the Prussian claims. As the elector survived Charles VI. 
tke question did not arise during his lifetime, but it illustrates the 
reckless imprudence with which he threw obstacles in the way even 
of -his own most cherished schemes. On the 26th of October, 1740, 
Charles VI. died. He left a disjointed, ill-governed, and exhausted 
collection of territories to his daughter Maria Theresa, whose 
succession was not one whit the more secure for the numerous and 
solemn engagements that had been entered into by the powers of 
Europe. : 


CHAPTER XVII. 


PRUSSIA BEFORE THE ACCESSION OF FREDERICK THE GREAT. 


§ 1. History of the House of Hohenzollern; acquisitions of territory 
§ 2. The Great Elector; his foretgn policy; claims upon Silesia ; 
treachery of the Austrian Government. § 3. Domestic policy of the 
Great Elector. § 4. Frederick I.; he acquires the title of king of Prussia. 
§ 5. Frederick William J.- his army; his civil administration; his 
foreign policy; relations with Austria. § 6. The royal family; 
Frederick William’s quarrel with his son. § 7. Attitude of Prussia 
in the war of the Polish Succession; gradual alienation from Austria ; 
death of Frederick William I. 6 


§ 1. Tse mark of Brandenburg had been formed in the tenth century 
on the northern frontier of Germany, for the combined purposes of 
defence and aggression against the Slavonic tribe of Wends. In 
the hands of the Ascanier margraves it became a powerful princi- 
pality and one of the four secular electorates of the empire. At 
the Council of Constance in 1415, Brandenburg was given by the 
emperor Sigismund to Frederick of Hohenzollern, and was thus 
united to the considerable territories which the Hohenzollerns already 
possessed in Franconia. Subsequently the family split into several 
branches, the elder line keeping the electorate, while the younger 
took the Franconian territories, which were known as the princi- 
pality of Culmbach, and were afterwards divided into Anspach 
and Baireuth. In 1603 and 1618 these younger lines died out, and 
their possessions fell to the reigning elector. But during their 
existence they had made acquisitions and founded claims which are 
of great importance. In 1524 George of Anspach had acquired by 
purchase the principality of Jagerndorf in Silesia. And in the 
next year his younger brother Albert, the grand master of the 
Teutonic Order, abandoned his ecclesiastical dignity and obtained 
the duchy of Prussia under the suzerainty of the king of Poland. 
Albert’s son, another Albert (1568-1618) married Maria Eleanora, 
eldest daughter and heiress of William duke of Cleve and Jiilich. 
The marriage produced only daughters, but of these the eldest 
was married to John Sigismund, elector of Brandenburg. 


324 MODERN EUROPE. ‘Cuar. xvr. 


Joachim Frederick, who was elector from 1598 to 1608, did not 
keep the Culmbach territories when they fell in to him in 1603, but 
granted them out again to his brothers Joachim Ernest and Christian, 
thus founding two new lines of Anspach and Baireuth. Jagerndorf 
he gave to his second son John George, from whom it was confiscated 
in 1623 by the emperor Ferdinand JI. The electorate passed to 
Joachim Frederick’s eldest son, John Sigismund (1608-1619), who 
succeeded in 1618 to the duchy of Prussia which was still under 
Polish suzerainty. John Sigismund plays an important part in 
history. In 1609 the duchies of Cleve and Jiilich becoming vacant by 
the death of duke William, he at once claimed them as the husband 
of the lawful heiress. He was opposed however by the palatine 
house of Neuburg, which had a rival claim through marriage with 
a daughter of William of Cleve. This dispute, which nearly kindled 
a great religious war in Europe, remained unsettled for many years, 
both the claimants keeping a firm hold of part on the inheritance. 
To emphasise his opposition to the Neuburg family who had gone 
over to Catholicism, John Sigismund became a Calvinist. Hence- 
forth Calvinism is the court religion of the Hohenzollern princes, 
although the bulk of their subjects were and remained Lutherans. 

\/ § 2. In the Thirty Years’ war George William of Brandenburg 
(1619-1640), as has been seen, played a very sorry part, and the 
only result of his attempted neutrality was that his_ territories 
suffered more than those of many princes who took an open and 
honourable side. But a new epoch opened for the house of Hohen- 
zollern with the accession of his son Frederick William, the Great 
Elector and the real creator of the Prussian monarchy. His first 
task was to redeem the disasters of the late rule. Departing 
altogether from his father’s policy, he succeeded in ridding his 
territories of foreign troops, and in the peace of Westphalia he 


emerged from the war with considerable acquisitions, Lower Pom- 


erania and the secularised bishoprics of Halberstadt, Minden and 
Magdeburg. This success was continued throughout hisreign. By 
his dexterous conduct in the northern war (1655-1660) which was 
kindled by Charles X. of Sweden, he achieved his greatest triumph, 
and freed Prussia for ever from the suzerainty of the Polish crown. 
In 1666 he concluded a final treaty of partition with the Neuburg 
family, by which they were to have Jiilich and Berg, while he kept 
Cleve, Ravensberg, and Mark. On the extinction of either family 
the territories were to pass to the other, to the exclusion of all 
collateral claims. This arrangement becomes of considerable 
importance later on. When Louis XIV. provoked a war by his 
attack upon Holland in 1672, the Great Elector, always a keen 
supporter of Protestantism, joined the league against France. To 


mae” 


A.D. 1598—1686. RISE OF PRUSSIA. 325 


draw him away from the Rhine, Louis induced the Swedes to 
invade Brandenburg. Frederick William had an old quarrel to fight 
out with Sweden. Hurrying northwards by forced marches, he not 
only repulsed the invaders and defeated them at Fehrbellin (June, 
1675), but even drove them away from Upper Pomerania, which had 
been given to Sweden by the treaty of Westphalia in spite of 
the Hohenzollern claims. This great acquisition, which would have 
given Brandenburg the desired opening to the Baltic, it was found 
impossible to keep. Louis XIV. insisted that the Swedes should 
not suffer for their alliance with him, and to the elector’s great 
disgust he had to restore his Pomeranian conquests in 1679. To 
compensate himself in some measure for this loss, Frederick William 
now demanded that the emperor Leopold should satisfy his claims 
in Silesia, which require some explanation. Jn the first place there 
was the duchy of Jigerndorf which had been confiscated by 
Verdinand II. in 1623, a high-handed action which had been 
constantly protested against by the Hohenzollerns. There were 
also other claims. In 1537 the elector Joachim II. had concluded 
an Lrbverbruderung, or treaty of mutual inheritance, with the dukes 
of Liegnitz. By this the dukes of Liegnitz were to obtain a part 
of the Brandenburg territories if the electoral line became extinct, 
while on the other hand, if they themselves died out, their Silesian 
possessions, Liegnitz, Wohlau and Brieg, were to pass to the Hohen- 
zollerns. Ferdinand I., Charles V.’s brother, maintained that the 
dukes of Liegnitz had no right to make such a treaty without 
his consent as king of Bohemia, and compelled them to revoke it. 
But the house of Brandenburg had always refused to recognise this 
revocation, and maintained that the treaty was perfectly valid. 
In 1675 the last duke of Liegnitz died, and the emperor Leopold 
at once took possession of his territories. At the moment Frederick 
William was occupied with the Pomeranian war, but as soon as that 
was concluded he demanded that the treaty should be executed and 
that he should also be put in possession of Jiigerndorf. At first the 
court of Vienna was obstinate in its refusal. But the threatening 
attitude of Louis XIV. both in political and religious matters, as 
illustrated in the réwnions and the revocation of the Edict of Nantes, 
compelled a reconciliation between the two chief German powers, 
and a compromise was arranged in 1686. By this Frederick William 
renounced his claims to Jigerndorf and Liegnitz, in return for which 
the emperor ceded to him the circle of Schwiebus in Silesia and 
guaranteed the Hohenzollern succession in Hast Friesland. But 
even this concession was a mere sham. At the very moment of 
concluding this treaty the Austrian ambassador made a secret 
agreement with the elector’s son and successor, by which the 


326 MODERN EUROPE. Cuap. xvi. 


latter pledged himself to restore Schwiebus immediately -on his 
accession. 

§ 3. The domestic policy of the Great Elector was even more im- 
portant than his foreign relations. He succeeded, not to a single 
united state, but to a number of provinces, separated from each other 
geographically as well as by laws and customs, and having little in 
common with each other except their German name and language 
and subjection to the same ruler. A Prussian could hold no office 
in Brandenburg, nor a Bradenburger in Cleve: each province 
excluded all but native troops. In Brandenburg the soldiers had 
to take an oath to the emperor as well as to the margrave, and in 
Prussia the estates could at first appeal to the king of Poland, and 
even when that connexion was broken off they were more than once 
inclined to restore it. In each province there were recognised 
assemblies of estates, intent only on provincial objects, and on 
maintaining their independence by checking the central power. 
The elector’s revenue came partly from his own domains and partly 
from taxes which were granted by the provincial assemblies. The 
internal condition of the country was discouraging. The peasantry 
were crushed in serfdom to the nobles and the fields had been laid 
waste during the war. Owing to the same causes, trade and 
manufactures had perished in the towns, and the schools and 
universities were deserted. There was perhaps more than one way 
in which material prosperity might be restored and some amount of 
unity given to the jarring interests of classes and provinces. But 
there was one way which was undoubtedly quicker and surer than 
any other, and which could alone commend itself to a ruler in the 
17th century. This was the establishment of a strong central 
power, which should govern not for its own sake but for the general 
good, and this, the fodriduticn of a paternal despotism jin the best 
and only true ‘sense, was the object which Frederick William set 
before himself. He had no sympathy with constitutional govern- 
ment, and it is certain that the time and the circumstances were 
unsuited for it. 

His first act. was the formation of a standing army, which gained 
him respect abroad and made him irresistible at home. For its 
support he induced the towns, not without difficulty, to grant him a 
permanent excise, which was a valuable addition to his revenue. 
The (estates! or Landstande, the Sty ngholds of provincialism, 
gradually lost most of their powers. } he nobles were deprived of 
their political independénce) though allowed to retain their mastery 
over the peasants, and were duced to look for honour and promotion 
in the service of the elector. Thus was created an absolute rule 
which represented and formed the unity of the state, and this 


A.D. 1688-1713. THE PRUSSIAN KINGDOM. 327 


power was uniformly exercised, not for selfish objects, but for the 
real welfare of the subjects. ‘Agriculture and commerce were 
fostered in every way and speedily recovered from the ravages of 
the war. Marshes were drained, and under the electors own 
supervision a canal, which bears his name, was cut between the 
Elbe and the Oder. To repair the losses in population foreigners 
were encouraged to settle in the country, and the revocation of 
the Edict of Nantes brought nearly 20,000 industrious Huguenots 
into the elector’s territories. 

§ 4. Frederick William’s successor, Frederick I. (1688-1713) is 
noteworthy chiefly because he obtained the title of king of Prussia. 
This was conferred upon him in 1700 by the emperor Leopold, 
who was anxious to obtain allies for the approaching war of the 
Spanish succession. Before this Frederick had had to keep his 
promise about restoring Schwiebus, but he protested that he had 
been deceived in the matter, and that therefore the renunciation 
of the Silesian territories was invalid and null. In domestic 
government the king departed from the traditions of his predecessor. 
Anxiety to support his new dignity led him to maintain a magni- 
ficent and expensive court, and this produced confusion and loss 
in the finances. Prussian troops played a distinguished part 
in the great war, but without much advantage to their own 
country. In one way perhaps Frederick’s reign was productive of 
good. It brought Prussia more into contact with Europe and 
contemporary civilisation than at any previous period. The king 
himself, and still more his wife Sophia Charlotte, the sister of 
George I. of England, were disposed to encourage learning and 
literature. The university of Halle was founded, and Leibnitz 
and other distinguished men were well received at the Prussian 
court. 

§ 5. The work of the Great Elector was carried on and to some 
extent completed by his grandson, Frederick William I., whose 
eccentricities, which almost amounted to madness, have won for 
him a name in history which he really deserved on other grounds, 
His first act on his accession was to dismiss the numerous court 
officials of his father and to establish the strictest economy both 
in his own household and in the public administration. His chief 
attention throughout his reign was given to military affairs, to 
the formation and training of a large standing army. Rejecting 
the schemes of a militia cr of compulsory service for all, he 
arranged that each district should furnish a certain quota of 
soldiers, who were to be enlisted by force if necessary. Artisans, 
tradespeople, and citizens generally, were exempted. In this way 
rather more than half of the army was raised. The rest was 


328 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. xvi. 


supplied by voluntary enlistment, which was carried on with 
great vigour in every part of Europe. At his accession the 
numbers of the army were 38,459, in the year of his death they 
were 83,436. Among these troops the most careful discipline 
was maintained. ‘The articles of war which had been drawn up 
by the Great Elector were re-issued, but the punishments were 
made more severe. The system of drill, which became. the model 
for Kurope, was due chiefly to Leopold of Anhalt-Dessau, the in- 
ventor of tne iron ramrod. Before this time, in Prussia, as in all 
other countries, the chief officers had the appointment to inferior 
places. I"rederick William reserved all appointments whatever to 
himself, and was careful to make them depend on merit alone. 
livery regiment was inspected at least once a year by the king 
in person, and an officer’s chance of promotion depended very much 
on the impression which his men made. The king himself had a 
special regiment of guards at Potsdam, which it was his 
mania to fill with the tallest men possible. The absurd lengths 
to which he carried this fad not only brought considerable ridicule 
upon him, but involved him in expenses which he would never 
have sanctioned for any other object, and also gave rise to un- 
pleasant quarrels with foreign states, whose territories were often 
treated with scant respect by zealous Prussian recruiting-sergeants. 

With regard to the army, Frederick William merely improved 
and developed the old established levies of the feudal times. The 
officers were in almost all cases nobles, while the common soldiers 
were their natural subjects, the peasants. But his civil adminis- 
tration was wholly alien to feudalism. The officials were mostly 
chosen from the burgher class and acted solely as the instruments 
of the crown. In 1722 the system was fully drawn up and put 
into working the next year. The old administrative colleges were 
abolished and their place taken by a single “ general directory.” 
This was appointed to superintend every conceivable branch of 
the administration. It had subordinate chambers in the provinces, 
and the councils of each circle, which consisted chiefly of nobles, 
were placed under its control. Thus a centralised government 
was established such as no country in Kurope had yet experienced. 
No detail was too insignificant for the king’s paternal care and 
attention. He compelled people to build houses both in Berlin 
and Potsdam, where many of the streets owe their origin to him. 
In order to encourage domestic manufactures he imposed severe 
penalties on all who wore or used foreign productions, and this, 
unlike most sumptuary laws, was successful. The clothing of the 
army provided a stable market for the Prussian wool, which had 
hitherto been made up in England. To agriculture the king 


A.D. 1718-1720. FREDERICK WILLIAM I. 329 


paid special attention. By improving the management of the 
royal domains he obtained a great increase of revenue, and his 
economic habits enabled him always to have a reserve fund at 
hiscommand. In the last reigna famine had desolated Lithuania, 
he re-peopled it with foreign emigrants. The Lutheran peasants 
of Salzburg, being persecuted by their bishop, were offered a refuge 
by the Prussian king, and more than 17,000 of them were trans- 
ferred at his expense to their new home. In religious matters 
Frederick William was tolerant of every form of belief except Roman 
Catholicism and scepticism. He himself attended the Calvinist 
service in the morning and the Lutheran in the afternoon. In fact, 
though he remained nominally a Calvinist, he had the greatest 
repugnance to the fundamental tenet of predestination. For learning 
he displayed a contempt which is to be explained by a conscious- 
ness of his own deficiency in that respect. ‘The scientific society 
which had been founded by his father, received from him as president 
one Gundling, a man of considerable attainments but worthless 
character, whose recommendation to the king was his admirable 
qualities as a court buffoon and laughing-stock. On the whole, 
while it is as difficult to admire Frederick William’s administration 
as his character, it is impossible to deny that Prussia owes to 
him no inconsiderable debt. 

In foreign politics Frederick William plays a much less distin- 
guished part than either of his two immediate predecessors. It 
has often been said that he was so attached to his machine-like 
troops that he was unwilling to expose them on the battle-field. 
But the real explanation is that he had absolutely no capacity 
for foreign affairs, and that he was perfectly conscious of it. 
His great anxiety was to make Prussia perfectly independent, 
and he was afraid of risking this independence by engaging in 
European complications, in which more capable and designing 
powers might use him asa tool. The Great Elector had made it 
a cardinal point of his policy to take part in all great affairs, so 
as to make the influence of Prussia felt and respected. His 
grandson pursued an exactly opposite plan, and in all negotiations 
tried to avoid committing himself to definite obligations. There 
was only one war in which he took part as a principal, that 
agains6, Charles XII. of Sweden./ This gave him his one great 
territorial acquisition, the town of Stettin and the adjacent district, 
which opened the Baltic to Brandenburg. Before this the treaty 
of Utrecht had handed over Spanish Gelderland to Prussia. 

After the conclusion of his treaty with Sweden in 1720, Frederick 
William adopted a neutral policy, and his troops were never 
employed again except as auxiliaries. We can trace several motives 


16 


330 MODERN EUROPE. Cuap, xvIt. 


which helped to direct his actions. He was anxious to maintain 
the balance of power, as the best security of Prussian independence, 
At the same time he inherited the old Hohenzollern loyalty to 
the empire, and. was eager to perform his obligations as a German 
prince. If the Austrian government had acted with any prudence 
or foresight, Prussia might have been made a devoted ally instead 
of becoming an enemy and a rival. One of the most important 
points in Frederick William’s reign was his gradual and involuntary 
estrangement from the emperor. His peaceful tendencies never 
made him lose sight of that territorial aggrandisement which had 
hitherto been so conspicuous a feature of Prussian history. The 
question about Jiilich and Berg was rapidly coming to a head. 
The last male of the house of Neuburg was the elector palatine, 
Charles Philip, and on his death the two duchies were to fall to 
Brandenburg by the treaty of 1666. But the elector palatine was 
anxious to break the treaty and to leave his territories undivided 
to the collateral branch of Sulzbach. Frederick William spared no 
pains to obtain guarantees for what he considered his unquestion- 
able rights. But the legal question was complicated by religious 
differences. Diisseldorf, the capital of Jiilich, was regarded as a 
border fortress of Roman Catholicism, and the Catholic powers 
were averse to allowing it to fall into the hands of the most 
powerful Protestant prince in Germany. ‘This explains the reluc- 
tance of the emperor to comply with the king of Prussia’s wishes 
on this subject. 

In 1725 came the first great crisis in European relations, caused 
by the activity of Ripperda and the alliance of Vienna between 
Spain and Austria. Ina personal interview with George I. and 
‘Townshend, Frederick William was convinced that the balance of 
power was in danger, and the promise that England would support 
his claims on Jiilich and Berg induced him to conclude the treaty of 
Hanover with France and England. But no sooner had he taken 
this decisive step than he repented of it. He felt that if war arose 
his territories would be the first to suffer. He saw that the 
maritime powers aimed chiefly at the suppression of the Ostend 
Company and of Spanish commerce, matters in which he had 
no interest whatever. The characteristic doubt arose in his mind, 
whether England, presuming on family connexions, was not using 
him as an instrument for its own designs. While he was 
thus hesitating, matters were decided by the arrival of an 
Austrian envoy, Count Seckendorf, with whom he had an old ac-_ 
quaintance. Seckendorf, who had been sent for that express 
purpose, succeeded in detaching the king from the league of Hanover. 
By the treaty of Wusterhausen (Oct. 12, 1726), the emperor 


A.D. 1725-1730. PRUSSIAN FOREIGN POLICY. 331 


pledged himself to do what he could to induce the elector palatine 
to recognise the Prussian claims to Jiilich and Berg, and Frederick 
William accepted the Pragmatic Sanction and promised to assist 
Charles VI. if his German territories were attacked. If Prussia 
could have been induced to throw itself altogether on the Austrian 
side, the emperor would probably have prosecuted the war. But as 
this was impossible, Charles VI. had to content himself with what 
he had gained, and in 1727 he threw over Spain, and signed a pre- 
liminary treaty with the allies. Meanwhile Seckendorf continued 
his activity at Berlin, and in December, 1728, a secret treaty was 
arranged which was a more definite confirmation of the terms of 
Wusterhausen. - Frederick William promised 10,000 men for the 
defence of the emperor’s German territories, and again guaranteed the 
Pragmatic Sanction, stipulating only that the archduchess must 
marry a German and not 4 Spaniard or any other foreigner. For the 
next few years the policy of Prussia was really dictated from Vienna. 
The king’s most trusted minister, Grumbkow, was in receipt of an 
Austrian pension, and he and Seckendorf played into each other's 
hands. To such an extent was the intrigue carried, that they gained 
over the Prussian minister in London and induced him to send garbled 
reports, so as to increase the king’s alienation from England. 

§ 6. These years are the darkest period of Frederick William’s 
reign. His Austrian connexion and the influence of Grumbkow and 
Seckendorf involved him in quarrels with his own family which 
became the chief subject of contemporary gossip, and have therefore 
become most conspicuous in later records. Frederick William was 
closely connected: with the house of Hanover. His mother was a 
sister and his wife a daughter of George I., and the latter, Sophia 
Dorothea, was extremely anxious to continue the connexion by 
marrying her eldest daughter to George II.’s son, Frederick Prince 
of Wales, and her own eldest son, the crown prince Frederick, to 
the English princess Amelia. This double marriage was at first 
acceptable to Frederick William, and negotiations went on about it 
for a long time. . 

But the close alliance with Austria involved 4 separation from 
England, especially after the conclusion of the treaty of Seville in 
1729. ‘There were also other grounds of quarrel, in the measures 
taken by Hanover to put a stop to Prussian enlistments, in the dis- 
putes about the property left by George I.’s wife, and the dis- 
satisfaction expressed in Hanover at the Prussian claims to succeed 
in East Friesland. It was just at an unfortunate juncture that Sir 
Charles Hotham arrived in Rerlin with formal proposals about the 
double marriage (1730). Frederick William was willing enough to 
marry his daughter to the Prince of Wales, but he was determined 


332 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. XVII. 


not to allow family alliances to influence his policy, and therefore 
refused to make any agreement about the marriage of the crown 
prince. The English government, whose object was naturally to 
secure the alliance of Prussia, would not agree to one marriage 
without the other. Asa last resource Hotham disclosed the relations 
between Grumbkow and the envoy in London, Reichenbach, which 
had been recently discovered. But this step had a wholly unexpected 
result. Instead of resenting Grumbkow’s treachery, the king fell 
into a violent rage at the interference of a foreign government 
between himself and his ministers. Hotham was dismissed with 
insult, and though apology was made for this, the negotiation was 
altogether broken off. 

This was a great blowto Sophia Dorothea, a woman of scarcely 
inferior obstinacy to her husband. She clung resolutely to the 
hope of the English alliance, and induced both her son and daughter 
to promise that they would never make other marriages than those 
which had been proposed. Frederick William, a despot to the core, 
was thrown into an ungovernable fury by this opposition in his own 
family. He had already grounds of displeasure with his eldest son, 
who had developed a character and habits very different from his 
father’s, and who preferred effeminate pursuits like literature and 
music to drilling and hunting. The king did not hesitate to vent 
his rage in acts of brutal ferocity and violence. Not only Frederick 
but also Wilhelmina could hardly venture into their father’s 
presence without the certainty of blows and insults. On one occasion 
Frederick William took his son with him to a great review held at 
Miihlberg by Augustus of Saxony and Poland, and there publicly 
flogged him and taunted him with cowardice for his submission. 
This last indignity was too much for the high spirited prince, who 
determined to escape from a life that was no longer tolerable. His 
plans were concerted with a favourite companion, Lieutenant von 
Katte. Advantage was to be taken of the king’s journey into Upper 
Germany to escape from the Rhine country into Holland. Every- 
thing was prepared to make the attempt from Steinfurt, near 
Mannheim, but the project was discovered by the vigilance of those 
who had been appointed to watch the prince. Frederick William 
was almost driven out of his mind by this last instance of insubordin- 
ation. He was convinced that his son was concerned in a secret 
plot against his crown and possibly his life, and he determined to 
have him tried as an officer guilty of desertion. Frederick was sent 
back into Prussia and closely imprisoned in the fortress of Ciistrin. 

His accomplice, Von Katte, was also arrested and condemned to 
perpetual imprisonment. But the king, enraged at the clemency 
of the sentence, ordered that he should be executed before his son’s 


+ 
. 
* 
* 


A.D. 1730-1734. THE CROWN PRINCE. 333 


windows. Meanwhile the court-martial which sat on the crown- 
prince sentenced him to death for desertion. Great fears were 
entertained that the king might play the part of Brutus, and 
numerous princes, including the emperor himself, intervened on 
behalf of the prince. At last he was induced to relent, but it 
was a year before he would see his son again, and even after a 
partial reconciliation had been effected, it required a great deal of 
self-control and no small amount of hypocrisy on Frederick’s part 
to avoid an outbreak of the quarrel. All prospect of the English 
alliance was of course at an end, especially as the king suspected the 
English minister of encouraging insubordination in his family. In 
spite of the anger of the queen, Wilhelmina was married to a junior 
Hohenzollern, Frederick of Baireuth, while a wife was found for the 
crown prince in Elizabeth Charlotte of Brunswick-Bevern, who was a 
niece of Charles VI.’s wife. This marriage, which strengthened the 
connexion between Austria and Prussia, was settled in 1732 and 
solemnised in the next year. The crown prince now obtained a 
separate establishment at Rheinsberg, where he was able to carry 
out his own scheme of life without coming into collision with the 
iron will of his father. 

§ 7. In 17338 the death of Augustus IT. kindled the war of the Polish 
succession, which was of great importance to the history of Prussia, 
especially as it broke off the close alliance that had existed for the 
last eight years with Austria. Frederick William had considerable 
interest in the Polish question, and was especially anxious to prevent 
the accession of the late king’s son, Augustus III., as the union of 


' Saxony and Poland was disadvantageous to Prussia. He himself 


was not averse to the election of Stanislaus Leczinski, but as this 
was distasteful to both Austria and Russia, he accepted the treaty 
of Léwenwolde (Dec. 1732) which aimed at procuring the crown for 
Emanuel of Portugal. Events speedily made this arrangement 
impossible, and before long Charles VI. was induced by hostility to 
France and the desire to get rid of a formidable opponent of the 
Pragmatic Sanction, to take up the cause of Augustus. This was a 
great blow to the Prussian king, but the French invasion of the 
empire kept him firm to his alliance, and on condition that his 
claims on Berg should be again confirmed, he offered to send 
30,000 troops to act on the Rhine. To his intense surprise the 
offer was rejected. Still he loyally sent the 10,000 men that. had 
been arranged for in 1728, and himself with his son joined Prince 
Eugene in the fruitless campaign of 1734. In the next year Charles 
VI. made a peace which in two points ran exactly counter to the 
wishes of the Prussian king. The integrity of the empire was 
sacrificed by the cession of Lorraine, and the elector of Saxony 


oa 


3) MODERN EUROPE. Cuap, xvi. 


was acknowledged as king of Poland. To make matters worse, the 
preliminaries of the treaty were not communicated to Frederick 
William, and he had to learn them independently. The Viennese 
government actually went so far as to blame the conduct of the 
Prussian troops in the late campaign. ‘To these slights was added 
a growing coolness on the subject of Jiilich and Berg. The emperor 
was now allied With France, and France had always supported 
the wishes of the elector palatine. It became evident that the 
numerous pledges on the emperor’s part were entirely worthless, 
and that the Prussian rights would be little regarded in comparison 
with the possibility of inducing the elector palatine to accept the 
Pragmatic Sanction. Frederick William’s natural irritation was 
increased by the thought that he had been a dupe all along, that 
Austria had always regarded Prussia as an inferior vassal state 
instead of an independent ally, and that in his blind adherence 
to a humiliating connexion he had involved himself in all the 
miseries of a family quarrel. It was under the influence of these 
feelings that he one day pointed to his son with the prophetic 
words: “There stands one who will avenge me.” 

A last attempt was made to induce the emperor to fulfil his 
engagements. On the outbreak of the Turkish war Prussian 
assistance was offered on condition that the treaty of 1728 should 
be confirmed, but the offer was refused. In fact, Charles VI., as we 
have seen, had practically decided to. take the opposite side, and 
early in 1739 he concluded his arrangement with France, by which 
provisional occupation of the disputed territories was secured for 
two years to the prince of Sulzbach. Repeated disappointments 
induced Frederick William to depart altogether from his previous 
policy and to open direct negotiations with: France, the power to 
which he had hitherto displayed a patriotic antipathy. Fleury was 
always willing to have two alternatives to choose between, and he 
offered to secure to Prussia part of the duchies when they became 
vacant. ‘This was accepted by the king, onthe ground that a part 
was better than nothing, and a secret treaty was arranged at the 
Hague tothis effect. Frederick William would have been placed in 
avery difficult position if the question had come up for solution 
in his lifetime and he had found himself in open hostility to the 
emperor. But the elector palatine survived him, and he escaped 
the turmoil and confusion that followed on his death (31 May, 
1640). The crown of Prussia passed to his son, a far abler, far 
more cultivated, and at the same time a far less honest prince, who 
had early been trained not only to endure hardship but also to 
practise deceit, and it is difficult to decide which of the two lessons 
was the more useful to him. 


CHAPTER XVIII. 


THE WAR OF THE AUSTRIAN SUCCESSION, 


x MARITIME WAR BETWEEN ENGLAND AND Spain.—§ 1. Mercantile 
rivalry ; the right of search and Jenkins’ ear; outbreak of war; fall 
of Walpole. II. THe Frrst SILESIAN WAR.—§ 2. Accession and 
attitude of Frederick the Great. § 3. Question of the Austrian suc- 
cession; Maria Theresa; other claimants. § 4. Attitude of the 
European powers; Prussian invasion of Silesia; battle of Mollwitz. 
§ 5. Prospects of the imperial election; attitude of France; Belleisle’s 
schemes; Prussia joins France. § 6. Critical position of Maria 
Theresa; conduct of the Hungarians; convention of Klein Schnellen- 
dorf. § 7. French and Bavarians take Prague; Frederick breaks the 
convention ; election of Charles VII. § 8. Frederick’s Moravian cam- 
paign, 1742; its failure; negotiations: battle of Chotusitz; treaties 
of Berlin and Dresden. UI. PER1op oF PRuUSSIAN NEUTRALITY.— 
§ 9. War in Bavaria and Bohemia, 1742. § 10. Affairs in Italy ; 
attitude of Sardinia; Italian campaign of 1742. § 11. Death of 
Fleury; the French ministry; position of Maria Theresa. § 12. 
Campaign of 1743 in Bavaria, Western Germany, and Italy; treaty of 
Worms; treaty of Fontainebleau. § 13. Campaign of 1744 in the 
Netherlands and on the Rhine. 1V. THE SEconD SILESIAN WaAaR.— 
§ 14. Frederick’s attitude while neutral ; his negotiations with France ; 
he resumes the war. § 15. Maria Theresa determines to recover 
Silesia; the Prussians in Bohemia; the Austrians retreat from the 
Rhine; Frederick driven from Bohemia; Charles VII. recovers Bavaria; 
Italian campaign of 1744. § 16. Death of Charlés VII. ; Maximilian 
Joseph concludes the treaty of Fiissen; attitude of Saxony. § 17. 
Campaign of 1745 in the Netherlands; battle of Fontenoy; Austrian 
invasion of Silesia; battle of Hohenfriedberg ; convention of Hanover 
between England and Prussia; election of Francis I. to the empire. 
§ 18. Battle of Soor ; winter campaign; Prussian conquest of Saxony ; 
the treaty of Dresden; end of Second Silesian war. V. CONCLUSION 
OF THE WAR.—§ 19. Italian campaign of 1745. § 20. D’Argenson’s 
scheme for the settlement of Italy ; its import and its failure. § 21 
Italian campaign of 1746; accession of Ferdinand VI. of Spain. § 22. 
Campaign of 1746 in the Netherlands; invasions of France; negoti- 
ations at Breda. § 23. French invasion of Holland; William 1V. 
becomes Stadtholder; failure of the siege of Genoa; French repulsed 
from Italy; negotiations at Aix-la-Chapelle. § 24. Campaign of 
1748; peace of Aix-la-Chapelle; results of the war. VI. Russia AND 


336 MODERN EUROPE. Cuar. xvmr. 


THE NORTHERN STATES.—§ 25. Reign of Anne; revolutions in Russia 
in 1740 and 1741; accession of Elizabeth. § 26. Foreign policy of 
Russia; war with Sweden; conquest of Finland; treaty of Abo; 
Swedish affairs. § 27. Alienation of Russia from Prussia; alliance 
with Austria. 


I. MaritiME WAR BETWEEN ENGLAND AND SPAIN. 


§ 1. In the fifth decade of the 18th century a period of open war 
succeeded to the confused diplomacy which had occupied Europe 
since the treaty of Utrecht. The occasion of this war was the 
disputed succession to the last male of the Hapsburg line in 
Austria, just as the former great war had followed the death of the 
last male of the Spanish Hapsburgs. But before this occasion 
arose, a smaller conflict had broken out between England and 
Spain, which requires a few words of explanation. England was 
still governed by Walpole, who had been at the head of a Whig 
ministry for twenty years, and who had made it one of his chief ob- 
jects to keep the country at peace. ‘There were two grand motives 
for his peace policy : to allow the country to recover from the exhaus- 
tion of the Spanish Succession war, and to deprive the Jacobites of 
the support of foreign powers. But powerful as the minister was, 
he was unable to continue this policy in the face of a growing 
desire among the people to avenge the insults offered by Spain to the 
maritime power of England, Spain was still ruled nominally by 
Philip V., but really by his second wife, Elizabeth of Parma, the 
“ termagant ” as Carlyle calls her, who had kept Europe embroiled 
by her constant efforts to obtain Italian principalities for her 
children. Besides the dynastic ambition of the queen, Spanish policy 
was directed to another object, the revival of that naval and 
commercial prosperity which the country had not enjoyed since the 
reign of Philip Il. The great obstacle in the way was the irritat- 
ing claim advanced by England to absolute supremacy by sea. 
Common jealousy of England was powerful enough to terminate the 
ill-feeling between France and Spain which had been aroused 
during the regency of Orleans, and in 1783 a Family Compact was 
concluded between the two branches of the house of Bourbon, by 
which they undertook to support each other in attacking the naval 
supremacy of England. ‘lhe treaty was kept so carefully secret 
that no hint of it reached the English ministers, but it un- 
doubtedly encouraged the Spaniards to bolder measures in the 
maintenance of what they considered their undoubted rights, 

The treaty of Utrecht had given England the right of importing 
negroes into the Spanish colonies, but had restricted the general 
trade to the sending once a year of a single ship of 600 tons burden. 
This restriction had been evaded by the rise of a systema of smuggling 


Ap. 1739-1742. WAR OF JENKINS’ EAR. ’ Say 


on the part of the English traders which was the chief grievance of 
which Spain complained. ‘To put a stop to it the Spaniards rigidly 
exercised their right of search, often seizing British vessels on the 
high seas and treating the crews with unjustifiable brutality. 
This gave rise to the greatest ill-feeling between the two nations, 
which was increased by other colonial disputes about the right of 
gathering logwood in Campeachy Bay and about the frontiers of 
Florida. Stories of the atrocities committed by Spanish sailors 
reached England, where they roused a tempest of popular indigna- 
tion which was encouraged by the opposition in order to discredit 
Walpole. ‘The most famous of these stories was that of Jenkins, an 
English captain, who maintained that he had been tortured and his 
ears cut off by a Spanish guarda costa. ‘The truth of this statement 
has never been established, but it was sufficient to rouse the people 
to a furious demand for reprisals. Walpole was forced against his will 
to declare war in October, 1739. The hostilities which followed 
were insignificant. During the long peace the naval organisation 
of England had fallen into disorder, and the conduct of the war was 
impeded by party jealousies. Admiral Vernon captured Porto 
Bello to the intense delight of the opposition. Anson plundered 
Paita, and with the Centurion made his famous voyage round the 
world. These were the only successes. An attack upon Carthagena 
was repulsed with great loss, and the war was soon swallowed up in 
the general European conflict. Its chief importance lies in the 
fact that it helped to direct English policy in the Austrian 
question, and that it led to the overthrow of Walpole, who 
retired from the ministry in January, 1742. 


Il. Tue First Simesran War. 


§ 2. Frederick William of Prussia died on the 31st of May, 1740, 
a year that was also fatal to Pope Clement XII., the Emperor 
Charles VJ., and the Czarina Anne of Russia. Great expectations 
had been formed of the young king of Prussia, Frederick II., who 
succeeded his father at the age of 28. For the last few years he 
had lived in retirement at Rheinsberg, apparently absorbed in 
literary pursuits and in correspondence with Voltaire and other 
French men of letters. Men built utopian anticipations upon the 
prospect of seeing a philosopher ascend a throne. His previous 
life, and above all, his famous quarrel with his father, led men to 
expect a complete reversal of the existing system of Government. 
But events proved the falsity of these hopes. Frederick was 
perhaps the only man in Europe who could fully appreciate the 
merits of his father’s system, which he determined strictly to 

16™ 


338 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. XVIII. 


uphold, while removing the excesses that had excited derision, 
The army was actually increased, but the costly regiment of giants 
at Potsdam was abolished. Economy was stili made a paramount 
object in both the court and the public administration, though the 
former was somewhat extended and improved. Ministers were 
retained in their offices, and the friends of the crown prince found 
that merit rather than past services could gain favour from the 
king. From the first Frederick maintained that absolute supremacy 
over every department which had been the most striking 
characteristic of his father’s system. The cnanges that were made 
were only superficial, although they clearly iilustrate the difference 
in character bet veen Frederick and his father. Perfect liberty was 
allowed to the press, torture was abolished except in a few carefully 
specified cases, and complete toleration was assured to all religious 
beliefs so long as their holders behaved as good subjects and 
abstained. from proselytism. In foreign politics the first four 
months of Frederick’s reign are important only as proving his 
determination to use for ambitious purposes the forces collected by 
his father. His first object was naturally the enforcement of those 
claims upon Jiilich and Berg which had absorbed Frederick William’s 
attention. The Elector Palatine was now eighty years old, so that 
the succession question must come up for decision before long. It 
was with this in view that Frederick started to travel through his 
western territories and paid the famous visit to Strasburg. The 
only result of the journey was a growing conviction that nothing 
but opposition was to be expected from Vienna, and this was 
strengthened by the emperor’s attitude in a dispute between the 
king and the bishop of Liége. In this Frederick convinced Europe 
of his determination to maintain his rights at all hazards, and the 
threat of invasion forced the bishop to purchase the disputed 
succession to Heristal by the payment of 200,000 thalers. Soon 
afterwards a wholly new direction was given to Frederick’s 
ambition by the news of Charles VI.’s death (20 October, 1740). 

§ 3. Two great questions were raised by this event ; the succession 
tothe Empire, which was nominally elective, but since 1438 had been 
practically hereditary in the house of Hapsburg, and the succession 
to the Austrian territories, which were absolutely hereditary, but 
had never yet fallen under the rule of a woman. This latter 
question had absorbed the attention of Charles VI. for the last 
twenty years, and the Pragmatic Sanction gave the inheritance to 
his elder daughter, Maria Theresa. Her hand had been a great 
prize in the matrimonial market, but her father’s wish and her own 
inciination had chosen as her husband Francis of Lorraine, who had 
found it necessary to purchase his bride by exchanging his heredi- 


A.D. 1740. MARIA THERESA. 339 


tary duchy for the alien state of Tuscany. The hope of a male heir 
had kept Charles VI. from seeking the election of his son-in-law as 
King of the Romans during his own lifetime, and this omission left 
the imperial succession to the interests or caprices of the electors. 

In the Austrian territories Maria Theresa assumed the govern- 
ment without any opposition. The young queen, who was just 
twenty-three years old, found her position the reverse of encourag- 
ing. The well-armed troops and the full treasury which Eugene 
had recommended as the best guarantee of the Pragmatic Sanction, 
were non-existent. The finances were in the most lamentable 
condition, and the army, partly through want of funds and partly 
through the disasters of the Turkish war, contained only half is 
numbers. The soldiers were scattered through the numerous and 
distant provinces, and were dispirited by recent reverses, while the 
most distinguished of the Austrian generals were expiating their 
ill-success in prison. To assist her in the work of government the 
queen had no one to rely upon except the octogenarian ministers of 
her father. Her only strength lay in her own character. In spite 
of her feminine weakness and her absolute inexperience, she was 
endowed with a resolute courage, which enabled her to win the 
affection of her subjects, and to save Austria from misfortunes that 
at one time seemed inevitable. If not the most successful, she is 
certainly the most attractive sovereign of the eighteenth century, 
and her memory is still affectionately cherished in the country that 
she ruled. ‘The first object that she set before herself was to 
procure her husband’s election as emperor, and to give him the 
requisite rank and dignity she named him as joint ruler of the 
Austrian States. Her next care was to reform the army and the 
finances, in order to meet any possible danger from without, and 
she inaugurated her reign by an act of justice and mercy when she 
released the imprisoned generals, Seckendorf, Neipperg and Wallis. 
But before time had been given to prosecute the needful reforms, 
the new government was called upon to confront difficulties and 
dangers far more serious than had been anticipated. 

The Pragmatic Sanction had been guaranteed over and over 
again by almost all the European Powers, and it was now to be 
discovered that Charles VI.’s precautions were as useless as they 
had been costly. The first opposition came from Charles Albert, 
elector of Bavaria, who was closely connected with the Hapsburgs 
through his wife, the second daughter of Joseph I. But his claim 
had an older basis than this marriage. In 1546 Charles V. had 
purchased the support of the duke of Bavaria against the League of 
Schmalkalde by a treaty, which secured the eventual succession in 
Austria to the Bavarian line. The then duke, Albert, had married 


340 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. XVIII. 


Anne, daughter of Ferdinand I., whose will was supposed to have 
named her descendants as heirs in case of the male line of Haps- 
burg becoming extinct. Directly after Charles VI.’s death the 
Bavarian envoy at Vienna made a formal protest against the 
accession of Maria Theresa, and demanded to see the will of 
Ferdinand I. The will was accordingly produced, and it was found 
to provide for the extinction not of ‘male,’ but of “lawful” 
descendants. Charles Albert, however, maintained that the docu- 
ment had been tampered with, recalled his envoy, and made no 
secret of his intention to enforce his claim. He was also the most 
prominent candidate for the vacant Imperial throne. 

Of the other claims the most important were those advanced by 
Saxony and Spain. Augustus III., elector of Saxony, had guaran- 
teed the Pragmatic Sanction in 17338, to obtain Charles VI.’s 
support in his candidature for the Polish crown. In spite of this 
he brought forward the claim of his wife, the elder daughter of 
Joseph I., protested against the appointment of Maria Theresa’s 
husband as joint ruler in Austria, and loudly maintained that he 
could not be allowed to give the Bohemian vote at the Imperial 
election. From the first it was evident that the Saxon claim was 
a manifest breach of treaty obligations, and that it was only 
advanced to be bought off by some concession from one or other of 
the competitors. The Spanish claim was still more baseless, but 
more formidable. Philip V., instigated by his ambitious wife, did 
not scruple to appeal to the old arrangement between the two 
Hapsburg lines, in defiance of which he had obtained his crown. 
The Spanish Hapsburgs were to inherit when the Austrian branch 
died out, he was the heir of the Spanish Hapsburgs, therefore the 
area territories ought to go to him. It was obvious, not only 
that this claim was absurd, but that all Europe would combine 
against it, and it was never seriously considered. But it gave Spain 
the desired opportunity to reclaim those Italian provinces which 
Charles VI. had obtained by the treaty of Utrecht. Elizabeth had 
already won the two Sicilies for Don Carlos, she now hoped to 
acquire a similar principality for her second son, Don Philip, in 
Lombardy and Tuscany. 

§ 4. It was certain that the succession, both in Austria and the 
Empire, would not be settled without the intervention of the great 
powers of Europe. The most important of. these, not only in 
itself, but also in its relations to the rival claimants, was France. 
After long hesitation France had, in 1735, guaranteed the Pragmatic 
Sanction in the amplest terms; and on this guarantee Charles VI. 
bad relied with implicit confidence during the last five years of his 
reign. On the other hand, France was closely allied by gratitude 


A.D. 1740. ‘THE AUSTRIAN SUCCESSION. 341 


io Bavaria, and by relationship to Spain. The all-powerful 
minister, Fleury, was inclined by temperament to evade these 
difficulties by pursuing a waiting policy, but it was doubtful 
whether he would be able to resist the strong martial party which 
was rapidly gaining ground at the French Court. Next to France 
the most important of European powers was England. As elector 
of Hanover, George II. was bound to a close alliance with the 
house of Hapsburg, while English interests, especially during the 
war with the Spanish Bourbons, made it imperative to maintain 
the power of Austria as a balance to that of France. ‘There was, 
therefore, no doubt that England would fulfil its obligation to 
support the Pragmatic Sanction, and that Holland would, as usual, 
follow in the wake of England. Russia had been one of the first 
powers to accept the Pragmatic Sanction, and Charles VI. had 
thought to make certain of its support by his conduct in the 
Turkish War. But this close alliance had been broken off by the 
death of the Czarina Anne, and by the accession of the infant 
Iwan VI. The chief power was now in the hands of Marshal 
Munnich, who was known to be better disposed to Prussia than to 
Austria. On the other hand, the Czar’s father, Anton Ulric of 
Brunswick, was a nephew of Charles VI.’s widow, so that some 
reliance was placed on his influence. But in the end the attitude 
of Russia proved unimportant, in consequence of a series of palace 
revolutions, which rendered impossible any decisive line in foreign 
affairs. ‘lhe only other state of any importance was Sardinia. 
Charles Emmanuel was descended from Philip II., and was there- 
fore able to put forward a claim somewhat similar to that of 
Philip V., ie., that he represented the Spanish Hapsburgs. But this 
was a merely formal contention, and it was to be expected that he 
would oppose any further increase of the Bourbon power in Italy. 
Charles Emmanuel’s policy was dictated, like that of his predecessors, 
by the desire of territorial aggrandisement. He inherited the 
traditional scheme of obtaining Lombardy, and he was willing to 
sell his support to whichever side offered him the largest bribe. 
From what has been said it was evident at Vienna that hostility 
was to be expected from Bavaria and Spain, that the attitude of 
France, Saxony, and Sardinia was doubtful, and that Maria ‘Theresa 
could rely with certainty upon the support of England and Holland 
and upon the neutrality of Russia, So far the prospect of affairs, if not 
encouraging, was at any rate not hopeless. But a sudden and unex- 
pected danger arose from a quarter where it was least expected. Of 
all the guarantors of the Pragmatic Sanction the most thorough- 
going had been Frederick William of Prussia, and the assent of the 
Ratisbon diet in 1731 was mainly attributable to his influence. In 


342 MODERN EUROPE. - Omar. xvi. 


spite of a growing alienation from the emperor, Frederick William 
had never shown any desire to repudiate his obligations, and more- 
over Prussia had been so long at peace that its neighbours had 
grown quite accustomed to seeing its army increased and trained, 
and never dreamt of its being actively employed. The most intense 
surprise and consternation was aroused when it appeared that the 
young king was about to revive the obsolete and almost forgotten 
claims of his family in Silesia and to enfurce them at the sword’s 
point. There seems no doubt that Frederick formed this determin- 
ation the moment he heard of Charles VI.’s death. Throwing off 
the ague from which he was suffering, he at once set to work, and 
summoned to his side Podewils and Marshal Schwerin, who were his 
only confidants in the matter. There were two alternative lines of 
policy to pursue. Hither Frederick might offer to support Maria 
Theresa against all opponents and demand Silesia as the price of his 
assistance: or he might ally himself with Bavaria and France and 
conquer Silesia in conjunction with them. Ultimately Frederick 
decided to seize Silesia and to leave the choice between the two 
alternatives open. If Maria Theresa would accept his terms, he 
would support her and give his vote for her husband, otherwise he 
would join her enemies and vote for Bavaria. In either case he 
was willing to give up his claims upon Jiilich and Berg, which 
had comparatively little value in his eyes. Historians have taken 
very great pains to analyse and discuss the merits of the Silesian 
claim. But it is noteworthy that Irederick himself says hardly any- 
thing about them. His motives, according to his own account, were 
“ambition, interest, and the desire to make people talk of me.” 
There can be no doubt that the claims were legally almost valueless, 
and that the invasion of Silesia was under all the circumstances an 
act of the most unjustifiable aggression. 

On the 16th of December, Frederick commenced his march, 
and almost on the same day his ambassador presented himself 
at the Court of Vienna. His instructions were to enlarge upon 
the dangers which threatened Austria, and to point out that 
the only security lay in the Prussian alliance, which could be pur- 
chased by the cession of Silesia. Maria Theresa and her husband 
rejected the insidious offer with scorn, and refused to negotiate as 
long as a single Prussian soldier remained on Austrian soil. But 
the danger was as great as it was unforeseen. ‘There was no army 
to oppose Frederick’s march, and he met with no resistance except 
from the garrisoned fortresses of Glogau, Brieg and Neisse. The 
Protestants, who had suffered from the orthodox rule of Austria, 
welcomed the Prussian King as they had formerly appealed to 
Charles XII. of Sweden. One town after another opened their 


eee a ee ee | 


a ee ee ee 


7) <7 e" 


» 


A.D. 1740-1741. INVASION OF SILESIA. 343 


gates to him, and even the capital, Breslau, undertook to remain 
neutral so long as it was allowed to retain its municipal indepen- 
dence and to be free from a foreign garrison. On the 8th of March 
the first of the three fortresses, Glogau, was stormed by the younger 
Leopold of Dessau, and Frederick now laid siege to Neisse. Here 
he was surprised by the sudden arrival of an Austrian army under 
Neipperg. Hastily raising the siege, the Prussians retreated towards 
Ohlau which they had previously occupied. But the enemy 
contrived to get in front of them, and to prevent being utterly cut 
off from supplies and communications it was necessary to fight the 
battle of Mollwitz on the 10th of April. The Prussian cavalry was 
the weakest arm of the service and was completely routed by the 
Austrian charge under Romer. [Irederick was induced or com- 
pelled to quit the field, narrowly escaped being captured at Oppeln 
which had been seized by the Austrians, and spent sixteen hours in 
almost solitary flight. Meanwhile the day had been retrieved by 
the steadiness of the Prussian infantry under Schwerin. At last 
the careful drill introduced by Frederick William and the old 
Dessauer produced its fruits. With their iron ramrods the Prussians 
could fire more than twice as fast as the enemy, and this gave them 
a tremendous advantage. ‘I'he Austrians were compelled to retire 
upon Neisse and the first of a long series of Prussian victories was 
won. Frederick was extremely chagrined at the part he had played 
in the battle and never pardoned Schwerin. But in spite of his 
personal humiliation his hold on Silesia was saved, and an immense 
impression had been made on public opinion in Iurope. Frederick 
after Mollwitz undertook the siege of Brieg, which was forced to 
surrender, and then, as Neipperg’s position was too strong to be 
attacked, he went into camp at Strehlen, where he busied himself 
with diplomacy and with the training of his cavalry so as to 
remove those defects which had been so conspicuous in the late 
battle. | 

§ 5. Meanwhile, Maria Theresa was still endeavouring to secure her 
husband’s election as emperor. ‘the great obstacle in the way was 
that the Lorraine family had come to be regarded as Frenchmen 
rather than Germans, and that Francis, now that he had lost 
Lorraine, had not a single possession in Germany. If his wife died 
he would be a merely nominal emperor, without any independent 
power of his own. In spite of these difficulties his election, in the 
early months of 1741, appeared by no means impossible. ‘The 
electors of Mainz and Trier were in his favour. The archbishop of 
Cologne was not on the best terms with his brother, the elector of 
Bavaria, and this family quarrel might be utilised to gain him over. 
The attitude of England seemed to leave no doubt as to the 


« 


344 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. XVII. 


Hanoverian vote. The Elector of Saxony wished to be emperor 
himself, but if that were out of the question, it seemed at least as 
likely that he would vote for Austria as for Bavaria. ‘The Elector 
Palatine could be gained over by guaranteeing Jiilich and Berg to 
the Sulzbach branch. Even the Prussian vote might be purchased, 
if absolutely necessary, at the price of Silesia. The right of voting 
for Bohemia had been transferred by Maria ‘Theresa to her husband, 
but Saxony had formally protested, and the interesting question as 
to the rights of a female elector would have to be settled by the 
electoral college. 

Prussia was still the only active enemy of Maria Theresa. 
Bavaria and Spain were powerless without the help of France. 
Bavaria had neither men nor money; and as long as the English 
fleets held the sea, Spain was cut off from Italy, unless France 
would grant an overland passage to Spanish troops. It therefore 
depended upon the attitude of France whether there should be a 
general war about the Austrian succession, or whether it should be 
restricted to the campaigns in Silesia. If Louis XV. and Fleury 
had been left to themselves they would probably have remained 
neutral, and in that case the war would never have reached any 
serious dimensions. The motive for French intervention lay in the 
memory of the long contest against the house of Hapsburg. ‘he 
policy of Richelieu, Mazarin, and Louis XIV. had brought such 
glory to France that men forgot that this policy had gained its end, 
and that the Hapsburgs, since the extinction of the Spanish branch, 
were no longer dangerous to France or to Europe. ‘The leader of 


the aggressive party was Charles Louis Fouquet, count of Belleisle, 


the grandson of Louis XIV.’s famous minister, and the represen- 
tative of the rising generation who found themselves shut out from 
a career either at home or abroad by Fleury’s jealousy of rivals and 
his inveterate love of peace. Belleisle’s scheme, as presented by 
him to the ministers, aimed at the partition of the Austrian 
territories. France was to annex the Netherlands and Luxemburg, 
Bavaria was to have Bohemia and the imperial crown, Sardinia and 
Spain were to divide Lombardy, Parma and Tuscany. Opposition 
from England might be bought off by the grant of commercial 
advantages. ussia could be rendered powerless either by a 
domestic revolution or by a war with Sweden. Saxony might be 
conciliated with a small slice of territory, afterwards settled as 
Moravia. Maria Theresa would be powerless against so many foes, 
so that it would be hardly necessary to draw the sword. Austria 
once partitioned, the supremacy of France would be assured, and 
the Bourbons would be the dictators of Europe. 

The scheme was grand enough to fascinate the inexperienced, 


Se ee ee ee) 


ee fe eS et ee a ee ee ee ee ee 


A.D. 1741. COALITION AGAINST AUSTRIA. 345 


while Fleury was worked upon by the fear that Francis, if he 
became emperor, would endeavour to recover Lorraine. The corre- 
spondence with Maria ‘Theresa became less and less cordial, while 
Belleisle wa8 raised to the rank of marshal, and sent as envoy to 
Germany. After visiting the courts of the Rhenish electors, where 
he was lavish in bribes and promises, he went on to Bavaria, and 
on the 22nd of May, 1741, concluded the treaty of Nymphenburg 
with Charles Albert. France undertook to support the elector’s 
claims to the Austrian succession as welt as to the empire, and to 
send at least 16,000 men to his assistance. In return, the French 
were to be allowed to retain any conquests that they might make 
in the Netherlands. On the 28th of Maya similar treaty was 
made by the Spanish envoy, who also promised men and money to 
Bavaria on condition that all eee of the Spaniards in Italy 
should be coufirmed to them. 

Prussia had not yet joined the great league that was forming 
against Austria; and Frederick, who saw through the French 
schemes for a paceen of Germany, was eager to force Maria 
Theresa to purchase his alliance by the cession of Silesia. His 
chief hope was based upon the intervention of England. The 
English parliament had declared warmly for Maria Theresa, but 
neither George II. nor Walpole wished for war against Prussia, the 
king for fear of Hanover being attacked, the minister because he 
deemed the coalition too strong, England was actuated solely by 
hostility to France, while common Protestantism was a link with 
Prussia. The primary object of English policy, therefore, was to 
induce Maria Theresa to grant Frederick’s demands. But the 
efforts of. the two envoys, Lord Hyndford and Sir Thomas 
Robinson, were foiled by the obstinate determination of the 
Archduchess not to break the Pragmatic Sanction by any cession 
of territory. The failure of these negotiations forced Frederick 
reluctantly to sacrifice his patriotism as a German to his interests 
as a Prussian king, and to join France. On the 5th of June 
the treaty of Breslau stipulated mutual assistance in case of attack, 
while in the secret articles Frederick promised his vote to the 
elector of Bavaria, and resigned his claims upon Jiilich and Berg. 
Louis XV. guaranteed to him Lower Silesia, with Breslau, and 
promised to send 40,000 men into Germany within two months, 
and to induce the Swedes to make war on Russia. Before the end 
of July, Augustus III. of Saxony joined the French alliance on 
condition of receiving Moravia and Upper Silesia. About the same 
time the Elector of Bavaria captured Passau. 

§ 6. The league against Austria being now complete, France pre- 
pared to take an active part in the war. ‘l’wo armies were formed, the 


346 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. XVIII 


one under Belleisle to co-operate with the Bavarians against Austria, 
the other under Maillebois to advance into the Netherlands, so as 
to threaten Holland and Hanover with invasion. As Belleisle was 
still occupied with diplomacy, his troops crossed the Rhine on the 
12th of August, under the command of Lenville. ‘To prove that 
they were auxiliaries rather than principals in the war, they 
assumed the Bavarian colours. Without opposition they joined 
the elector’s troops, and the combined forces took Linz on the 10th 
of September, so that they stood within three days’ march of 
Vienna. Everything seemed to favour the League. Sweden 
declared war against Russia, and George II., frightened by the 
advance of Maillebois, concluded a convention by which Hanover 
was to remain neutral and the Hanoverian vote was promised to 
Charles Albert. 

The terror which was inspired at. Vienna by the news of the 
French advance forced Maria Theresa to resume the project of 
buyivg off the hostility of Prussia. Robinson was sent to Frederick’s 
camp at Strehlen, but the concessions which he was authorised to 
offer were insufficient, and were haughtily rejected by the king. To 
emphasise his adhesion to the French alliance, Frederick now 
occupied Breslau, which had hitherto retained its independence. 
At the same time he urged the allied armies to advance from Linz 
against Vienna. 

It was a critical moment. for Maria Theresa. Her husband was 
unpopular, and she herself was absent in Hungary, the province 
which for nearly a century had been in constant revolt against the 
Hapsburgs. At this juncture she determined to disregard the 
advice of her German ministers, and to grant the Hungarians 
the right of arming themselves, which had hitherto been studiously 
withheld. ‘This proof of confidence, and the visible annoyance of 
the hated Germans, roused the sensitive Magyars to enthusiastic 
devotion. An insurrection, or armed levy of the whole population, 
was unanimously voted, and no opposition was made to the appoint- 
ment of the grand-duke Francis as joint-ruler. It is true that the 
queen had to purchase these concessions by the grant of consti- 
tutional privileges, which seriously limited the central power, and 
that the Hungarian troops, always disorderly and unmanageable, 
did not render very effective assistance. But the moral effect was 
prodigious. At the moment when everything seemed lost, when 
the capital was being deserted and there was no ally to be called in, 
the province which had shown the greatest aversion to Hapsburg 
rule suddenly set an example of loyalty which made a profound 
impression both in Austria and in Europe. At the same time 
Maria Theresa was materially aided by disunion among her enemies. 


A.D. 1741. KLEIN SCHNELLENDORF. 347 


Vienna must have fallen if it had-been promptly attacked. But 
the French, either for military reasons or through jealousy of 
Prussia and Bavaria, refused to advance from Linz, and leaving 
Vienna on their right entered Bohemia. 

The immediate danger to Austria was over, but it had already 
produced an important result in compelling Maria Theresa to 
consent to concessions. To save her capital she had opened simul- 
taneous negotiations with France and with Prussia, An envoy was 
sent to treat with Belleisle at Frankfort; and he offered to give 
France Luxemburg, to hand over the Netherlands to Bavaria, and 
to satisfy Spain in Italy. In return for this the invasion of Austria 
was to be given up, Prussia was to be compelled to restore Silesia, 
and the grand duke Francis was to obtain the empire. These 
proposals were based on the supposition that the object of France 
was to obtain territorial acquisitions. But this, in Belleisle’s mind, 
was wholly secondary to the humiliation of Austria, and the 
proposals were unhesitatingly rejected. More successful were the 
negotiations which Marshal Neipperg was authorised to conduct 
with Prussia. The real mediator was Lord Hyndford. On the 9th 
of October a secret conference was held at Klein Schnellendorf, at 
which only five persons were present, I*redeiick himself and Colonel 
Goltz for Prussia, Neipperg and Lentulus for Austria, and Hynd- 
ford. The terms of a convention had been already agreed upon. 
The [russians were to be allowed to take Neisse after a sham 
siege of fourteen days. Neipperg was to be allowed to withdraw 
his army without molestation, the Prussian troops were to winter 
in Upper Silesia, and Frederick promised to abstain from all 
hostilities against Austria and Hanover. Within a few months a 
formal treaty was to be arranged, by which Lower Silesia was to be 
definitely ceded to Prussia. ‘The contracting parties swore to keep 
the convention completely secret, and Frederick declared that if 
this were broken he should hold himself freed from all obligations. 
Nothing was signed on either side, and the only record of the 
convention was a writing in the hand of Lord Hyndford. The 
siege of Neisse was commenced, and after a formal cannonade the 
fortress surrendered on the 2nd of November, Neipperg was 
allowed to march off with his army to the defence of the Austrian 
territories. ¢ 

The convention of Klein Schnellendorf is one of the great stum- 
bling-blocks in the way of Frederick’s apologists, and as a masterly 
piece of treacherous double-dealing it has noequal. Maria Theresa’s 
object is unmistakable. It was absolutely necessary to withdraw 
from Silesia the one army which Austria possessed, and this could 
only be effected by a sacrifice. She may also have hoped to irritate 


= ‘ 


348 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. XVIII. 


the other allies against Prussia. Frederick’s policy is more intricate 
but equally obvious. It was a great thing for him to obtain 
possession of Neisse without having to strike a blow for it. Lower 
Silesia passed absolutely into his possession, and he was able to 
recruit his exhausted troops. At the same time his future actions 
were left entirely untrammelled. The condition of secrecy could 
not possibly be observed. Even if nothing had been betrayed on 
the part of Austria, the sham siege of Neisse and the departure of 
Neipperg’s army could not fail to arouse the suspicion of his allies, 
He gained a great immediate advantage by making promises which 
he never intended to keep, and in fact he provided himself before- 
hand with a convenient pretext for breaking them. The only 
people whom he sacrificed were his allies, who suddenly found that 
they had to reckon with Neipperg’s army, which had hitherto been 
occupied in Silesia. 

§ 7. It is probable that when Frecerick concluded the convention 
he expected the allies to fail in their invasion of Bohemia, and 
at the moment this appeared more than possible. Their com- 
munications with Upper Austria and Bavaria were cut off by 
the march of Neipperg’s army into Moravia. Charles Albert 
wished to turn back for the maintenance of his Austrian conquests, 
which had been left in the charge of Count Ségur. But the French 
officers insisted upon attacking Prague. LBelleisle himself hurried 
up from Frankfort to assume the command, but was detained by a 
serious illness at Dresden. To everybody’s surprise Prague was 
taken at the first assault (25th Nov.), thanks to the energy and 
good fortune of the young Maurice de Saxe, a son of Augustus II. 
and the Countess of Konigsmark. The loss of Prague was a 
terrible blow to Maria Theresa, and was followed by even worse 
disasters. On the 5th of December a revolution in Russia deprived 
Austria of a friend. The Regent Anne, who governed for her infant 
son Iwan, was overthrown, and the government was assumed 
by Elizabeth, the youngest daughter of Peter the Great, who was 
inclined to a French alliance. Worst of all, the fall of Prague de- 
cided Frederick to break the convention of Klein Schnellendorf. 
With cynical audacity he announced to Lord Hyndford his deter- 
mination to stand by the winning side, and sent Schwerin to invade 
Moravia. On the 27th of December the Prussians occupied Olmiitz, 
and Frederick promised to join them early in the next year. 

At the end of 1741 Maria Theresa’s position seemed almost 
hopeless. Upper Austria and great part of Bohemia were held by 
the French and Bavarians. The Prussians occupied Silesia, and had 
begun the invasion of Moravia. ‘The only Austrian army, that of 
Neipperg, lay at Budweis unable to move in either direction. But 


< 
4 
g 
¢ 


A.D. 1741-1742. ELECTION OF CHARLES VII. 349 


the courage of the queen was never more conspicuous, and fortune 
turned at the critical moment. Belleisle’s illness had led to the 
appointment of a new commander, Broglie, who was sluggish and 
incapable, unpopular with his own officers, and personally detested 
by Frederick. J'rom this time we can trace a growing alienation 
between Prussia and France, which encouraged Austria to adopt a 
bolder attitude. Regiments were withdrawn from Italy, and, with 
the Hungarian levies, were formed into a second army under 
Khevenhiiller. Early in January, 1742, these troops advanced into 
Upper Austria, where they were welcomed by the population. On 
the 23rd Linz was captured, and on the next day Passau surrendered 
to an advanced body of hussars under Barenklau. The Austrian 
provinces were recovered. 

These successes came too late to influence the course e of events at 
Trankfort, where the Elector of Bavaria was chosen emperor as 
Charles VII. by eight votes on the 24th of January, the very day 
of the fall of Passau. Before his coronation, the luckless emperor 
heard that his own territories were invaded. Khevenhiiller over- 
ran Bavaria in three weeks, and captured the whole province except 
Strassburg, Ingolstadt, and a few other fortresses. He was prevented 
from completing the work by an order to send 10,000 men to join 
the main army at Budweis, the command of which was transferred 
from Neipperg to Charles of Lorraine, Maria 'lheresa’s brother-in- 
law. 

§ 8. Meanwhile Frederick, not without great difficulty, had obtained 
the assistance of the Saxon army and a French detachment, which 
were placed under his command for the Moravian campaign. His 
object, which has often been misunderstocd, was to force Maria 
Theresa to give up Bohemia to Bavaria, Moravia to Saxony, and the 
whole of Silesia with Glatz to himself. He had no real desire to 
agorandise Saxony and Bavaria, but he felt that they would be 
safer neighbours than Austria. As long as Maria Theresa kept 
Bohemia and Moravia, she would always aim at the recovery of 
Silesia; if she lost those provinces, Silesia would be safe. At 
Olmiitz he was met by an Austrian envoy, who offered the cession 
of Silesia ; but Frederick, confidently anticipating success, refused to 
desert his allies. On the 15th of February he took Iglau, where the 
French troops were recalled hy Broglie, and after some difficulty 
he induced the Saxons to join him in the siege of Briinn. But 
Frederick found the Moravian campaign a very different affair from 
that in Silesia. Mixed forces were far more difficult to handle 
than his own subjects, and the population was bitterly hostile to 
the invaders. Before the sluggish Charles of Lorraine had decided 
which enemy to attack, the Prussian king had given up the enter- 


350 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. XVIII. 


prise in disgust. On the 25th of April the Prussians evacuated 
Olmiitz, and marched to Chrudim in Bohemia, where they en- 
camped for a period of rest. ‘The Austrians found that they had 
nothing to do but occupy the deserted fortresses, and Prince Charles 
now determined to follow the enemy into Bohemia. 

The failure of the Moravian campaign, and Frederick’s evident 
alienation from his allies, led to a renewal of negotiations with 
Austria. Maria ‘lheresa had recently been strengthened by the fall 
of Walpole’s ministry, which had been partly due to his failure to 
give efficient support to the Austrian cause. Foreign affairs were 
now in the hands of Carteret, who was regarded as the champion of 
intervention in Germany. Parliament declared strongly for sup- 
porting Austria against I’rance, and voted a subsidy of half-a- 
million. But on one point Walpole’s policy was followed by his 
successors. ‘They gave it to be understood that England could take 
no part in the war until terms had been arranged with Prussia. 
Maria Theresa was now eager for an agreement which would give 
her the support of the maritime powers, and ensure the triumphant 
expulsion of the French from her territories. She was willing to 
give up Lower Silesia with Glatz and great part of Upper Silesia, 
but she demanded that, in return for these ample concessions, 
Frederick should join her against France and Bavaria. This the 
king unhesitatingly refused. He would be neutral, but even he was 
not capable of such a political somersault. Moreover he wished to 
keep Silesia, and not to fight for it over again with France and 
Saxony. On this difference the negotiations, which were again 
conducted by Hyndford, broke down, and it was obvious that the 
war must go on until one or other party should give way. | 

Charles of Lorraine was now marching from Moravia into 
Bohemia, and the Prussians lay between him and Prague. If the 
negotiations had succeeded he would have been allowed to attack 
the French without hindrance. That was now impossible, and on 
the 17th of May the Prussian and Austrian armies met for the 
second time in a pitched battle at Chotusitz or Czaslau. The result 
was the same as at Mollwitz, with the great difference that the 
victory was not won in Frederick’s absence, but was gained in great 
measure by his own skill and energy. The battle was a diplomatic 
move rather than a great military achievement, and was fought 
by Frederick to force Austria to fall in with his demands. This 
was fully realised at Vienna, and the negotiations were at once 
resumed. . 

The news of Chotusitz had roused the French to make some show 
of energy. A detachment of Broglie’s troops won a small victory at 
Sahay over the Austrians under Lobkowitz, who had been left in 


¥ 


A.D. 1742. TREATY OF BERLIN. 351 


Bohemia by Prince Charles. The French might have held their 
position in Pisek and Pilsen if they could have prevented the union 
of the Prince’s army with that of Lobkowitz. Belleisle, who had 
returned from Frankfort after the election, hurried off to Frederick’s 
camp to induce him to do something. There he must have seen 
pretty clearly through the king’s designs, especially as the Prussians 
made not the slightest effort to check the enemy’s retreat. Prince 
Charles joined Lobkowitz without any difficulty, and at once 
advanced against the French. Broglie decided that he could not 
resist so large a force, and retreated from point to point. First 
Pisek and then Pilsen were taken by the Austrians, and the French 
were compelled to retire ignominiously under the walls of Prague. 
This news decided Frederick. He was afraid that if Prague were 
taken, Maria Theresa would withdraw the powers that had been 
given to Hyndford, and try to recover Silesia. He sent off a courier 
at once to his minister Podewils, urging him to arrange a treaty 
with Hyndford as soon as possible. He was to stipulate for Lower 
Silesia and Glatz, with the border-counties of Bohemia if possible ; 
if not, then he must~get as much as he could of Upper Silesia. 
Podewils, who had always wished to come to terms with Austria 
and England, had already commenced the negotiations of his own 
accord, so that the matter was readily settled. On 11th June, the 
very day ou which the courier arrived, the preliminaries of peace 
were signed at Breslau. Maria Theresa surrendered Lower Silesia, 
Upper Silesia with the exception of Teschen, Troppau, etc., and 
the county of Glatz in full sovereignty for ever. Frederick 
renounced all claims elsewhere, and undertook to withdraw all his 
troops from Austrian soil within sixteen days. Difficulties arose 
about the exact line of frontier, and further negotiations were 
transferred to Berlin, where the final treaty was signed on the 28th 
of July, 1742. The example of Prussia in deserting France was 
promptly followed by Saxony. Augustus III. tried hard to obtain 
some advantage from the bargain, but Maria ‘Theresa refused to give 
up another foot of territory. Ultimately, just to satisfy the king’s 
desire to save his dignity, Austria promised to assist Saxony in 
obtaining Erfurt, if this could be done with the consent of the 
archbishop of Mainz, to whom it belonged. On the 7th of September 
the treaty was formally signed at Dresden. 


III. Pertop or Prusstan NEUTRALITY. 


§ 9. The defection of Prussia and Saxony ruined all the French 
schemes of partitioning Austria, and Fleury and Belleisle had 
nothing to aim at but the release of the troops from their imprison- 


352 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. XVIII. 


ment in Bohemia. This was first attempted by diplomacy, and terms 
were offered which contrasted strongly with the haughty tone hither- 
to employed by the court of Versailles. But Maria Theresa, eager 
for revenge upon an unprovoked assailant, and encouraged by the 
prospect of English assistance, refused to listen to any proposal of 
peace. She had hopes cf obtaining some compensation for Silesia, 
and wished to force Charles VII. to alienate part of Bavaria in ex- 
change for the Netherlands and a strip of northern France. To 
effect this the military strength of the French must be more 
completely broken than it would be if their army were allowed to 
march peaceably out of Bohemia. But the practical measures of 
Austria were less energetic than her intentions. Khevenhuller in 
Bavaria was still weakened and discontented by the loss of part of his 
troops, and the grand duke Francis, whosuperseded his brother Charles 
in Bohemia, was not ready to besiege Prague until the end of July. 
France, on the other hand, was discouraged rather than defeated. 
At the risk of opening the way for English intervention, Maillebois’ 
army was ordered to march eastwards to reinforce Broglie and 
Belleisle, while another detachment was sent under Harcourt into 
Bavaria. These energetic measures nearly succeeded in wresting 
their expected success from the Austrians. Francis, alarmed at 
the approach of a new hostile army, left 12,000 men under Festetics 
to watch Prague, while he himself, with the bulk of his troops, 
marched to meet Maillebois. Khevenhiiller, who had failed to 
prevent the entrance of the French into Bavaria, tried to redeem 
matters by joining the grand duke. But by this step he left the 
duchy undefended. Seckendorf, the second imperial general who 
had deserted the Hapsburg cause when it seemed to be unfortunate, 
was now in command of the Bavarian troops, and he found no 
difficulty in taking Munich (7th October), and recovering the 
whole of Bavaria except Scharding and Passau. 

Meanwhile the combined armies of Khevenhiiller and the grand 
duke contented themselves with holding the Bohemian frontier 
against Maillebois by a series of marches and counter-marches. As 
the French commander was not more active or capable than his 
opponents, this proved a sufficiently, easy task. It was now 
decided to send Lobkowitz with reinforcements to join Festetics 
before Prague. Marshal Broglie had already left the city to 
supersede Maillebois, so that Belleisle was left in sole command. 
He had taken advantage of the cessation of the siege to bring 
supplies into Prague, and could have stood a siege for some time, 
if there had been anything to gain by it. But his one thought now 
was to leave the city as soon as possible, and to march by Eger into 
Bavaria. He deceived Lobkowitz by the measures which were 


A.D. 1742. WAR IN BOHEMIA. 303 


taken for a feigned defence, and on the night of the 16th of 
December the French troops, numbering about 14,000, started on 
their march. They suffered frightful hardships from the cold, and 
from the attacks of the light-armed Hungarian cavalry. But 
Belleisle’s resolution overcame all obstacles, and by marching night 
and day he reached Eger on the 27th of December after having lost 
more than 2000 men on the way. In Prague some 6000 men had 
been left under Lieutenant Chevert, not so much to defend the 
place as because they were unable to bear the hardships of a winter 
march. Even this force Lobkowitz did not venture to attack, but 
opened negotiations with Chevert.. On 25th December the 
capitulation was signed by which the garrison was allowed to 
march out with all the honours of war, and Prague returned to 
the possession of Austria. | 

Thus the Austrians, after an arduous campaign, had gained less 
than they might have done by accepting the despised overtures of 
peace. Prague had been won back, but Bohemia had not been 
evacuated, as the French still occupied Eger. And to gain this 
they had sacrificed nearly all their conquests in Bavaria. Broglie, 
when he assumed the command in the place of Maillebois, had given 
up all idea of entering Bohemia, and had marched to Bavaria in the 
hope of taking Passau before the close of the campaign. ‘The 
Austrians, once more under Charles of Lorraine, Francis having 
returned to Vienna, followed close upon the French, and foiled this 
attempt, but were themselves repulsed from Braunau. After these 
indecisive movements the two armies went into winter-quarters to 
recruit themselves for the next year’s campaign. 

§ 10. It is now necessary to turn for a moment to Italy, which in 
1742 had also become the scene of military operations. The 
treaties of Utrecht and Rastadt had given Charles VI. consider- 
able possessions in Italy; Milan with its fertile territories, the 
impregnable Mantua, the strong places on the Tuscan coast, and 
Naples. Sardinia, which on account of its distance was com- 
paratively useless, had been exchanged in 1720 for the far more 
profitable island of Sicily. In Italy, as in Germany, Austria was 
indisputably the foremost power. But Charles VI. and_ his 
“Spanish Council” had not been successful rulers in Italy, and 
the result was the loss of Naples and Sicily in 1735 to Don Carlos 
of Spain. As compensation, the emperor had received Parma and 
Piacenza, and, in a sense, the grand duchy of Tuscany, which was 
given to his son-in-law as an equivalent for Lorraine. At the 
same time a considerable strip of the Milanese had been ceded. to 
Sardinia. 

Maria Theresa succeeded therefore by the Pragmatic Sanction to 


1% 


354 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. xvrir. 


Milan with its diminished territories, Mantua, the Tuscan ports, and 
Parmaand Piacenza, while her husband was grand duke of Tuscany 
in his own right. The independent states in the peninsula, were 
Naples under Don Carlos, the papacy now held by Benedict XIV., 
Venice, Sardinia, which included that island ‘with Savoy and 
Piedmont and was ruled by Charles Emanuel II]., an Modena 
under one of the Este family. No hostility was to be expected 
from the papacy or from Venice. ‘The duke of Modena was unim- 
portant, and Charles Emanuel was married to the sister of the 
grand duke of 'Tuscany, so that his support might be relied on, unless 
some opportunity occurred for gratifying the traditional greed 
of his family for increasing their territories. The only ruler who 
was likely to be hostile was Charles of Naples, but he was very 
distant from the Austrian territories, and was not very formidable, 
unless he received support from his relatives in Spain. It was on 
Spain, therefore, that the question depended whether Maria Theresa’s 
accession would be followed by disturbances in Italy similar to 
those in Germany. Of the attitude of Spain there was no doubt 
for a moment. The restless wife of Philip V. had never been 
reconciled to the loss of the duchy of Parma, where she had been 
born and bred, and determined to spare no effort for its recovery. 
The great difficulty in the way of such an enterprise was the 
journey between the two peninsulas. The sea was held by the 
hostile English fleet, and to effect the land passage it was necessary 
to pass through the territories both of France and Sardinia. From 
France, when once-Fleury had decided to follow the policy of 
Belleisle, nu difficulty was anticipated, but the attitude of the 
king of Sardinia, who held the passes of the Alps, was much more 
doubtful. It was obviously to the interest of Sardinia to maintain 


the status quo, to balance the Bourbons and the Hapsburgs in Italy 


so as to prevent either of them from obtaining a predominance 
which would be dangerous to its own independence. Of the two 
families the Bourbons were the more dangerous, because of the 
neighbourhood of France to Savoy. If the Hapsburgs were supreme 
in Italy, it was always possible to join France against them. As 
against these considerations of policy there was the never-ceasing 
desire to obtain as much as possible of Lombardy. Lombardy was 
in the hands of Austria, not of Spain, and the court of Turin was 
well aware that the largest concessions would be made by the party 
not in possession. In fact Spain proposed to expel the Hapsburgs 
from Italy, to cede Lombardy as far as the Adda to Sardinia, and to 
be content with Mantua, Parma and Piacenza. On these terfs 
Charles Emanuel joined the alliance that had been made at 
Nymphenburg, and from this time was regarded by Spain as an 


° taht gga stipe <a 


A.D. 1741-1742. WAR IN ITALY. 355 


ally. But the king of Sardinia was fully conscious of the politic 
arguments against the aggrandisement of the Bourbons in Italy. 
He formed the alliance for the mere purpose of forcing Austria to 
pay him a good price for breaking it. It was of the greatest 
importance to Maria Theresa to buy over Charles Emanuel, but 
it was difficult for her to consent to the cession of territory which 
was demanded, not only a large portion of Lombardy as far as 
Pavia, but also territory belonging to Genoa, which Sardinia wanted 
as an opening to the Mediterranean. England undertook the 
mediation with Sardinia as with Prussia, but failed to induce the 
queen to make such extreme sacrifices. Suddenly, in November, 
1741, came the utterly unexpected news that the Spaniards had 
eluded the English fleet and had landed an army in the gulf of 
Genoa. This gave a great impulse to the negotiations, but a serious 
obstacle still existed in the claim which Charles Emanuel put 
forward to the Austrian succession as a decendant of Philip II. 
Naturally Maria Theresa was unwilling to admit an ally. into the 
fortresses of the Milanese who might maintain that they were his 
own by right. Ultimately the question of territorial cessions to 
Sardinia was postponed, and on the Ist of February, 1742, a 
provisional convention was signed to settle military arrangements. 
According to this the Austrian troops were to march southwards 
and to occupy Mantua and Mirandola, so as to prevent the 
Spaniards from entering Lombardy. Charles Emanuel was to 
send auxiliary troops, and if necessary was to advance with his 
whole army. But his claims were not to be prejudiced by the 
convention. As long as it lasted he was pledged to do nothing to 
enforce them, but he reserved the right to repudiate the bargain by 
a month’s notice, and within the month he was to withdraw all his 
troops from Austrian territories. 

Luckily for the allies, Montemar, the Spanish general, showed 
none of the energy that had characterised his movements when he 
conquered Naples aud Sicily in 1734. Instead of advancing at 
once against Lombardy, he marched into the papal states to wait 
for Neapolitan reinforcements, and it was not till March, 1742, that 
* he was ready for the campaign. The Austrian commander was 
Count Traun, who had been trained under Guido Stahremberg and 
proved a worthy pupil of that able general. The first object of 
the two armies was to occupy the territory of Modena, where duke 
Francesco d’Este had hitherto been allied with the Hapsburgs but 
had been induced by Maria Theresa’s misfortunes to join Spain. The 
Austrians and Sardinians had little difficulty in taking Modena 
(June, 1742), and the duke had tw fly to Venice. This first success 
decided the campaign. ‘The allies seized Mirandola, and advanced 


356 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. XVII 


to meet Montemar, who promptly retreated through Rimini and 
Ravenva to Foligno. The Spanish disasters were completed when 
an English fleet appeared. before Naples, and by the threat of a 
bombardment compelled Don Carlos to recall his troops and to 
promise strict neutrality for the rest of the war. The Government 
of Madrid was so dissatisfied with Montemar’s conduct that, in 
spite of his former services, he was superseded by a younger officer, 
Count Gages. Maria Theresa was encouraged by the substantial 
victory of her troops to aim at the recovery of Naples and Sicily and 
the complete expulsion of the Bourbons from Italy. But here she 
came into collision with her ally. Charles Emanuel had _ been 
willing enough to exclude the Spaniards from Lombardy, but he 
was not eager to drive them from Italy, simply to restore the 
Hapsburgs to their old supremacy in the peninsula. Not only did 
he refuse to advance, but he found a pretext for withdrawing his 
troops in the attack that was threatened against Savoy by another 
Spanish army under Don Philip which had marched through 
southern France. ‘The other ally of Austria, England, refused to 
employ its fleet for the conquest of Naples: and the pope would 
not admit the Austrian troops into his territories. Traun was 
therefore compelled to withdraw his army to the north of the 
T'anaro where he occupied a strong position. Montemar’s successor, 
Gages, had advanced against Modena, but then gave up the enter- 
prise and went into winter quarters near Bologna, which was governed 
by the ex-Spanish minister Alberoni; so the campaign of 1742 
ended, leaving Austria in secure possession of its territories and of 
Modena, but with no other advantage being gained. 

§ 11. The first important event of 1743 was the death of Cardinal 
Fleury, on the 29th of January, at the age of 93. His ministry had 
lasted 17 years, and was rendered illustrious by the annexation of 
Lorraine, but otherwise he had conferred few benefits upon France. 
He had been compelled at the close of his career to give up the 
policy of peace which was congenial to him, and the result was 
disaster and disgrace to the French arms. For several years 
speculation had been rife as to his successor. Louis XV. declared 
that -he would. imitate his great-grandfather, and be his own 
minister: but his disinclination for business made this an empty 
profession. The chief result of Fleury’s death was that unity in 
the administration was replaced by discord. There was no one 
who could be regarded as first minister, but there were several rivals 
for the chief influence over the king. The most important of «these 
were three men who held no office, Cardinal Tencin, the persecutor 
of the Jesuits, Marshal Noailles, and the duc de Richelieu, who 
owed a brief tenure of power to the favour of the king’s mistress. 


. 
q 
@ 

» 

. 
. 
a 


A.D. 1742-1743. DEATH OF FLEURY. 357 


Besides these, there were the ministers proper, Orri, the controller- 
general of finance, Amelot, minister of foreign affairs, Maurepas of 
marine, d’Argenson of war, and the chancellor d’Aguesseau. The 
government of Fleury had not been successful, that of so many rival 
pretenders to his place was not likely to be more fortunate. The 
brilliant Belleisle, who two years ago had been regarded as certain 
to be the next minister of France, had just returned with the 
remnants of his Bohemian army. ‘The failure of his grand German 
schemes involved the ruin of his prospects at home, and he retired 
into temporary obscurity. 

The treaty of Berlin had been purchased at a great sacrifice, but 
that it was worth the loss of Silesia is proved by comparing the 
situation of Maria Theresa at the beginning of 1743 with that which 
she had occupied the year before. The project of partitioning the 
Austrian territories, at one time so certain of success, was now a thing 
of the past. Upper Austria, Bohemia and Moravia, which twelve 
months ago lay at the mercy of her enemies, had been triumphantly 
recovered. Jiger was the only place which the French still held in 
Bohemia. Charles VII., the nominal head of the hostile league, 
had suffered great losses, France was humiliated, the Spaniards 
had utterly failed in their attack on Lombardy. The powers 
which a year ago had been so energetic in their aggressions 
were now compelled to stand on the defensive. England was at 
last about to take a decisive part in the war. The Swedish war 
with Russia, on which France had relied to occupy the great 
northern empire, had been unsuccessful, and before the close of the 
year Sweden had to accept the humiliating peace of Abo. The 
attitude of Maria Theresa changed with the altered circumstances. 
No longer was she content to uphold the Pragmatic Sanction, she 
would take vengeance for the unprovoked attacks that had been 
made upon her, and would extort from her enemies some compen- 
sation for the loss of Silesia. | 

§ 12. The military events of 1743 are more important in their 
results than in themselves, and the three campaigns, in Bavaria, 
Western Germany, and Italy, may be passed over in rapid review. 
In Bavaria, Charles of Lorraine and Khevenhiiller had a very easy 
task. Broglie,;who commanded the army of Maillebois, refused to give 
any assistance to Seckendorf, and finally marched back to France 
without striking a blow. The Bavarian troops were now com- 
pletely outnumbered. Munich was retaken by the Austrians, and 
the unfortunate Charles VII. had to fly from his capital to Frank- 
fort. On the 27th of June the convention of Niederschénfeld was 
signed, by which the whole of Bavaria, except Ingolstadt, was handed 
over to Austrian occupation until the conclusion of a general 


358 - MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. XvIIL 


treaty. In August the French had to give up Eger, the last relic 
of their Bohemian conquests. Before this Charles of Lorraine had 
advanced from Bavaria to the Rhine, to co-operate against France 
with the allied troops which England had brought into Germany. 

In 1742 a mixed English and Hanoverian army had entered the 
Netherlands, and early in the next year it commenced its march 
towards Germany with some 20,000 Austrian auxiliaries under the 
duke of Arenberg. ‘The “ Pragmatic Army,” as it was called, was 
commanded by Lord Stair, and so dilatory were its movements, that 
it did not cross the Rhine till April. Through the whole of May 
it remained in complete inactivity near Mainz and Frankfort. ‘To 
oppose the allies, a French army was formed out of the remnant of 
Belleisle’s troops with fresh recruits, and placed under the command 
of Noailles. He contented himself with carefully following the 
enemy, so as to frustrate any attempt either to attack France or to 
interfere in Bavaria. The explanation of Stair’s inactivity is to be 
found in the negotiations which England was conducting to induce 
the Dutch to take part in the war. For a long time the republic, 
which had no real interests at stake, was persistent in its refusal. 
But at last the Orange party, which wished for an opportunity to 
restore the stadtholdership, got the upper hand, and in May, 1748, 
Holland untertook to send 20,000 men to support the cause of Maria 
Theresa. The prospect of this reinforcement impelled Stair to 
more active measures, and leaving his magazines at Hanau, he 
advanced towards Aschaffenburg. But Noailles, who carefully 
watched all his movements, outmarched him and blocked the way. 
At this juncture George II. arrived to assume the command in 
person. To extricate himself from the difficult position, George 
determined to return to Hanau. But Noailles, anticipating this 
resolve, was again too quick for the enemy, and occupied a strong 
position at Seligenstadt, while he sent his nephew the duc de Gram- 
mont to seize the village of Dettingen, about half-way between 
Aschaffenburg and Hanau. The king found himself compelled to 
fight a battle in a disadvantageous position (26th June), and he 
would certainly have been defeated but for an error of Grammont, 
who left his position at Dettingen to meet the enemy in the valley 
below. This deranged all Noailles’ elaborate plans, the battle 
became a confused melée, and the French had ultimately to retreat. 
But the victory, such as it was, proved of very slight importance. 
Noailles was not pursued or harassed in any way, and George II. 
was quite content to have secured his one object of removing all 
obstacles to his return to Hanau. So hasty was he in effecting this 
that he actually left his wounded on the field of battle to the 
humanity and courtesy of the French commander. 


abt, SET on 6 


A.D. 1748. PROGRESS OF THE WAR. 359 


The news of the battle of Dettingen was received with the 
greatest enthusiasm at Vienna. Maria Theresa was confident that 
the junction of Charles of Lorraine with the victorious allies must 
compel France to yield. But nothing came of these expectations. 
Quarrels arose between the English and Hanoverian troops, and 
Lord Stair in disgust threw up his command. Charles of Lorraine, 
eager to win glory for himself, refused to join the English king. 
At last it was decided to attack France in two divisions. The 
Austrians under Charles were to enter Lower Alsace by Alt-Breisach, 
while the Pragmatic Army was to cross the French border further 
north. Two French armies were set on foot to oppose the invasion ; 
one under Coigni against the Austrians, the other under Noailles 
against George II. The defence was completely successful. “Prince 
Charles advanced to Alt-Breisach, but failed to effect a passage 
across the Rhine. The Pragmatic Army crossed the Rhine below 
Mainz, but made no effort to attack Noailles.. Ultimately the 
two invading armies gave up their enterprise and went into winter 
quarters. The French were excluded from Germany, but their own 
frontiers were secure from attack. 

In Italy the Spanish commander, Gages, received orders to renew 
the enterprise in Lombardy which had failed in the preceding year. 
Crossing the Tanaro, he attacked the Austrians under Traun, but 
was completely defeated at Campo Santo and compelled to retire to 
Rimini. Traun wished to follow the enemy and complete his 
discomfiture, but was prevented by the attitude of his ally, the king 
of Sardinia. Charles Emanuel had not yet extorted from Maria 
Theresa any definite promise of territorial concessions, and until 
that was effected he was determined not to continue the war. To 
give greater force to his demands he entered into negotiations with 
the courts of Versailles and Madrid, which were eager for the 
Sardinian alliance. English mediation had to be called in to effect 
a reconciliation between Austria and Sardinia. As in the case of 
Prussia, England did not hesitate to urge unwelcome sacrifices upon 
Maria Theresa, with a vehemence that may have been politic but 
was certainly unwelcome at Vienna. But too many interests were 
at stake for the queen to hold out. On the 13th of September, 1743, 
the important treaty of Worms was arranged between England, 
Austria, and Sardinia. Maria Theresa ceded to Charles Emanuel 
the Milanese west of the Ticino and Lake Maggiore, the cities and 
districts of Pavia and Piacenza, and the right of re-purchasing the 
marquisate of Finale from the Genoese. Finale had been sold by 
Charles VI. to Genoa for 1,200,000 piastres, but the emperor had 
reserved the right of reclaiming the territory on paying back the 
money. The transference of this right to Sardinia was bitterly 


360 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. XVII. 


resented by the Genoese and ultimately drove them to side with 
France and Spain. In return for these concessions, Charles 
Emanuel guaranteed Maria Theresa in the possession of all her 
other territories, and promised to assist Austria with 40,000 men 
until the conclusion of a general peace. ‘The settlement of the Sar- 
dinian difficulties enabled the Austrians to take the offensive in Italy. 
Khevenhiiller having lately died, Traun was recalled to take his 
place in. Germany, and his command in Lombardy was given to 
Lobkowitz. At the head of a mixed force of Austrians and 
Sardinians, Lobkowitz attacked the Spaniards in the papal terri- 
tories and drove them back from point to point. Ultimately, at 
the end of October, Gages went into winter quarters at Pesaro. 

The treaty of Worms was a serious blow to France and Spain, 
and to meet it they concluded a new alliance at Fontainebleau (25th 
October). By this the two Bourbon lines pledged themselves to a 
permanent union. France promised to declare war against England 
and Sardinia; to assist Spain in conquering the Milanese and 
Parma for Don Philip; not to negotiate with England until Gib- 
raltar, and if possible Minorca too, had been restored to Spain; and 
to force England to resign the colony of Georgia, which had recently 
been usurped from the Spaniards. This treaty, which pledged 
France to obtain such enormous and almost impossible advantages 
for Spain, without any recompense for itself, was the work of 
Maurepas. It is characteristic of Louis XV. that he saw and 
expressed clearly the defects of the treaty, bat had not sufficient 
strength of mind to refuse his signature to it. The first result of 
this new family compact was seen in the energy with which Savoy 
was attacked from the French side. For two years a Spanish army 
had been assembled in southern France under Don Philip, but as 
yet it had done nothing. In October of this year an attempt was 
made to force a passage through the Alps, but Charles Emanuel’s 
defensive preparations were fully sufficient and the attack was 
repulsed. 

§ 13. The war was far more vigorously prosecuted in 1744 than in 
the preceding year. One cause of this was a sudden outburst of 
energy on the part of Louis XV. His third mistress, Madame de la 
Tournelle, who became duchess of Chateauroux, strove to play the 
part of an eighteenth-century Agnes Sorel, and to inspire the king 
with a love of military glory. At the samestime the national 
spirit of the French was roused by the threatened attack on their 
frontier, and the old hatred of England was revived in all its force. 
The first enterprise of the year, a maritime expedition under 
Maurice de Saxe to restore the young Pretender, was frustrated by 
astorm. Hitherto France and England had professed to take part 


ee eS eee 


a 


A.D. 1743-1744. PROGRESS OF THE WAR. 361 


in the war as auxiliaries only. This farce was terminated by a 
declaration of war against England in March, and against Austria 
in April. It was determined to make the Netherlands the chief 
seat of hostilities, and in May a large army set out, accompanied 
by the king in person. ‘The real commander was Maurice de Saxe, 
who was now made a marshal of France. The allied army had 
wintered in the Netherlands, the English under General Wade, 
the Dutch under Lewis of Nassau, and the Austrians under 
Arenberg. They had been weakened by the withdrawal of several 
Iinglish regiments to resist the threatened invasion, and the want 
of unanimity among the three generals rendered them quite unable 
to oppose the enemy’s advance. Courtrai, Menin, Ypres and other 
fortresses were captured by the French in rapid succession, and. it 
was difficult to foresee any limit to their conquests when the 
campaign was suddenly interrupted by news from Alsace. 

Prince Charles of Lorraine had been married in the winter to . 
Maria Theresa’s younger sister, the archduchess Marianne. In 
the spring he resumed his command, accompanied by Marshal 
Traun, who in this year proved himself the ablest Austrian general 
since Eugene and Guido Stahremberg. Prince Charles had decided 
to renew the enterprise that had been foiled in 1743, to cross the 
Rhine into Alsace, to recover from Germany the lost provinces, 
and to inflict such losses on the French monarchy that it should 
make peace on terms dictated from Vienna. ‘To oppose him there 
were the Bavarian troops under Seckendorf, which had left Bavaria 
after the convention of Niederschénfeld and now occupied a strong 
position at Philipsburg, and the French army under Coigni. To 
deceive the enemy Prince Charles pretended to meditate crossing 
the Rhine near Mainz. Seckendorf at once left his position and 
marched up the river to Speier, while Coigni advanced directly upon 
Mainz. Before the enemy could be undeceived the Austrians 
commenced their passage lower down on the 380th of June, and 
effected it without serious difficulty in three days. - Lauterburg and 
Weissemburg were taken, and the Austrian light cavalry devastated 
Alsace to the borders of Lorraine. Prince Charles would gladly 
have advanced at once to the recovery of the inheritance of his 
family, to the renunciation of which he personally had always refused 
his assent. But he was afraid to go too far from the Rhine, lest 
the bridges might be broken behind him and his communications 
cut off. And at this juncture he found that he had to face a more 
formidable enemy than had been anticipated. As soon as he heard 
that the Austrians were actually in Alsace, Louis XV. determined 
to undertake the defence of his own territories. Leaving Marshal 
Saxe to occupy a defensive position in the Netherlands, he marched 

Whe 


362 ! MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. xviit. 


southwards with the main body of the French army. At Metz 
the king was seized (4th August) with a sudden and dangerous 
illness. The greatest excitement was aroused by the news in 
Paris, and so great was the popular devotion to the king, and so 
enthusiastic the rejoicings when he was out of danger, that this 
episode in his reign gave Louis the epithet of the Bien-aime. 
This illness exercised a fatal influence on the conduct of military 
affairs. Noailles, who assumed the command, was absorbed in 
watching the king’s health, and it was not till the 17th of August 
that the army of Flanders effected its junction with Coigni. But 
before that time the news that Frederick of Prussia had invaded 
Bohemia had reached the Austrians, and Prince Charles received 
orders from Vienna to quit Alsace, 


IV. THe Seconp SILESIAN War. 


§ 14. The Austrian successes in 1743 had inspired Frederick the © 


Great with considerable misgivings for the safety of Silesia. He was 
especially alarmed by the treaty of Worms, and by a defensive 
alliance between Austria and Saxony which had been concluded at 
Vienna in December. In both of these the Austrian territories had 
been guaranteed without any exception, and the Saxon alliance 
could hardly be directed against any power but Prussia. He 
professed to have found definite proofs of hostile intention in a 
letter from George II. to Maria Theresa; but the assertion is 
probably unfounded, as England was especially anxious not to 
alienate Prussia. Asa supporter of Charles VII., Frederick resented 
the occupation of Bavaria, which made the emperor a powerless 
fugitive in Frankfort, the laughing-stock of both enemies and 
allies. From the very beginning of 1744 he meditated a new 
breach with Austria, not only to secure what he had already 
obtained, but also in the hope of gaining that portion of Bohemia 
which he had failed to get in the treaty of Berlin. In May he 
formed the Union of Frankfort, which was joined by Charles VIL, 
the Elector Palatine, and tne Landgrave of Hesse-Cassel. Its 
objects were to restore the lawful constitution of the Empire, to 
induce Maria Theresa to restore Bavaria, to settle the disputes 
about the Austrian succession, and to arrange a final peace. As 
no other German princes would join the league, it was of slight 
practical importance, but it served Frederick’s purpose so far that 
it gave him a pretext for war with Austria as the champion of 
German interests and of the imperial constitution against wanton 
aggression. . 

At the same time Frederick resumed his connection with France, 


. 


A.D. 1744. PRUSSIA RENEWS HOSTILITIES. 363 


and sent Count Rothenburg as his envoy to Paris. A court intrigue 
led to the dismissal of Amelot from the ministry of foreign affairs, 
and enabled Rothenburg to conclude a treaty at Paris on the 5th of 
June. ‘The French undertook to attack the Netherlands, so as to 
prevent the maritime powers from sending aid to Austria. Another 
French army was to march through Westphalia to attack Hanover, 
and France undertook to induce Sweden and Russia to conclude a 
defensive alliance with Prussia. Frederick himself promised that if 
the main Austrian army invaded Alsace he would at once attack 
Bohemia with 80,000 men. But to this promise two very definite 
conditions were attached. If Charles of Lorraine were compelled 
by Frederick’s action to quit Alsace, the French were to pursue him 
closely, to recover Bavaria for the emperor, and to harass the 
Austrian territories. ‘To compensate Frederick for his exertions the 
four Bohemian circles to the right of the Elbe (Bunzlau, Leitmeritz, 
Pardubitz and Konigingratz) were to be united with Silesia and 
ceded to Prussia, It was still necessary to obtain the Emperor’s con- 
sent, but this was effected by a secret treaty between Charles VII. 
and Frederick (24th July). By this Frederick pledged himself to 
use all possible means to carry out the objects of the Union of 
Frankfort and to conquer Bohemia for Charles, who, on his part, 
confirmed the proposed cession of the four circles to Prussia. 

During his two years of neutrality Frederick had never lost sight 
of a possible renewal of the war. By strict parsimony and regular 
administration his exhausted treasury had been re-filled. The 
Silesian fortresses, Neisse, Glogau, Brieg, Cosel and Glatz had 
been repaired and strengthened. The Prussian army had been 
increased and incessantly trained, and everything was prepared for 
the outbreak of hostilities. ‘The news of the invasion of Alsace by 
the Austrians decided Frederick to fulfil his engagements, although 
the stipulated alliance with Sweden and Russia had not been 
concluded. On the 7th of August: his envoy at Vienna, Count 
Dohna, made a formal declaration that, as a German elector, he 
could no longer endure to see the emperor oppressed and the 
constitution broken by Austria, that he was determined to send 
auxiliaries to aid Charles VII., but that his conduct was in no way 
a breach of the treaty of Berlin. The same contention was made 
in a manifesto which he published at Berlin. On the very same day 
he demanded from the Saxon government a free passage for his troops 
as imperial auxiliaries. Augustus III. was in Warsaw, whence he 
ordered that the demand should be refused. Fortunately for 
Saxony this order arrived too late from Poland, the Prussian troops 
were already on the spot, and the authorities did not venture on a 
refusal. In four columns, the Prussians, 80,000 strong, crossed the 


364 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. XVIIL 


Bohemian frontier, three under the king in person, and the fourth 
from Silesia under Marshal Schwerin. 

§ 15. The news of the Prussian movement was received in Vienna 
rather with joy than with dismay. For more than a year Maria 
Theresa had made her chief object to obtain some compensation for 
the loss of Silesia. But endless obstacles had been interposed, by her 
allies as much as by her enemies. Now the far more desirable 
prospect was opened of recovering Silesia itself. Hitherto that had 
been impossible, because England, the only important ally of Austria, 
had guaranteed the treaty of Berlin. But Frederick himself had 
now broken the treaty and England was .bitterly indignant at his 
conduct. From this time Maria Theresa determined to subordinate 
every other enterprise to the re-conquest of Silesia and the 
humiliation of the Prussian king. She herself paid another visit to 
Pressburg, where her presence exercised the same magical influence 
as before, and the Hungarians voted a second “ insurrection.” ‘The 
Austrian commander in Bavaria, Count Batthyani, was ordered to 
march with the main body of his troops to Bohemia. Reinforce- 
ments were sent to Count Harsch, the governor of Prague, and his 
garrison was raised to 14,000 men. But the chief reliance was 
placed in the army of Charles of Lorraine, who received orders to 
give up the invasion of Alsace and to return as speedily as possible 
to the defence of Bohemia. 

. But for the moment Bohemia was almost defenceless. Batthyani 
had barely 20,000 men, and it was hopeless to oppose them to the 
Prussian army. Early in September Prague was besieged, and on 
the 16th Harsch had to surrender unconditionally. Opinions were 
divided as to future movemenis.. Schwerin advised an immediate 
attack upon Batthyani, and after crushing him proposed to take 
Pilsen and to occupy the passes between Bohemia and the Upper 
Palatinate, so as to bar the advance of Charles of Lorraine. 
Belleisle, who had recovered some of his influence as France became 
more active in the war, and who had recently arrived in the 
Prussian camp, urged.on the other hand that the Prussians should 
advance boldly southwards and conquer the whole of Bohemia. 
His advice was followed by Frederick. Tabor, Budweis, and 
other strong places were taken and compelled to swear fealty to 
Charles VII. By the fourth of October the Prussians had advanced 
almost. to the Austrian frontier. But this was destined to be the 
limit. Saxony obstinately refused to support Prussia, and carried 
out the treaty of Vienna by sending 20,000 men to co-operate 
with the Austrians. Still more fatal to Frederick’s projects was the 
failure of the French to fulfil their obligations. 

__ Charles of Lorraine had determined, even before his instructions 


a 


AD. 1744. PRUSSIAN FAILURE IN BOHEMIA. 365 


arrived from Vienna, to recross the Rhine. But this was a task of 
appalling difficulty. The armies of Noailles and Coigui had just 
united and were considerably superior to hisown. The genius of 
Traun and the negligence of the French enabled the Austrians to 
triumph over all obstacles. On the 23rd of August the passage 
was effected with a loss of only 800 men in the very face of the 
hostile armies. It was an achievement that naturally inspired the 
troops with confidence both in themselves and in their leaders. 
On the 10th of September they reached Donauwéith, whence 
Prince Charles set out for Vienna, while Traun organised the defence 
of Bavaria. General Barenklau was left in command of the province 
with 20,000 men. ‘Then the Austrians continued the march east- 
wards, and on the 2nd of October effected a junction with the 
forces of Batthyani. The French had been bound by the treaty with 
Frederick to molest the Austrians on their retreat and to follow 
them with 40,000 men Neither condition was fulfilled, nor was 
the stipulated army despatched against Hanover. WNoailles con- 
tented himself with laying siege to Freiburg, and with sending 
12,000 men under Ségur to assist Seckendorf in Bavaria. The 
plan of Frederick’s campaign was ruined. He had deserted the 
French in 1742, they now paid him back in his own coin. 

In Bohemia Frederick waited in uncertainty as to what would be 
the enemy’s movements. To his surprise, instead of attacking 
Budweis, they marched northwards to meet the 20,000 Saxons, 
who joined them on the 22nd of October. Their numbers were now 
about 70,000, while Frederick’s were reduced to 60,000. Still the 
latter might have been successful if he could have forced on a 
decisive battle. But in this attempt he was foiled by the masterly 
strategy of Traun, who was the guiding genius of the Austrian 
campaign. ‘Traun’s plan was to occupy an unassailable position 
which barred the advance of the Prussians, and to hold it until want 
of supplies compelled them to retreat to another district: then he 
followed them and repeated the manceuvre. Frederick chafed at this 
intangible obstacle in his way, but could do nothing. ‘'Traun, as he 
honestly confessed, completely out-generalled him, and he was 
forced to retire step by step towards the Silesian frontier. Through- 
out the campaign the Austrians were immensely assisted by the 
native population. By the end of November, Frederick recognised the 
necessity of giving up Prague and his other conquests and of evacuat- 
ing Bohemia altogether. The enterprise which ended in such com- 
plete failure had been a costly one. Of the 80,000 men who had 
entered Bohemia, barely 40,000 returned to their homes. Frederick, 
thinking the campaign was over, entrusted the command to Leopold 
of Anhalt-Dessau and hurried off to Berlin. But the Austrians, at 


366 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP, XVIIL. 


the express command of Maria Theresa, disregarded the winter 
climate and entered Silesia. Frederick had to return to urge the 
methodical old Dessauer to hasten his preparations. The Prussians 
took the offensive in January, 1745, and speedily forced the enemy 
to retire into Moravia. But it was not till February that they 
were able to go into winter quarters. 

Meanwhile the efforts which the Austrians had made in Bohemia 
had cost them their hold on Bavaria. As soon as Prince Charles 
was well out of the way, Seckendorf, reinforced by the French 
under Ségur and by troops from Hesse and the Palatinate, 
marched to Donauwoérth, which was captured on 2nd October. 
Barenklau had not sufficient forces to venture upon a conflict with 
the enemy. Munich, which was of slight military importance, 
was taken on the 12th of October. This welcome news brought 
Charles VII. back to his native country, and on October 28 he 
re-entered his capital amidst the jubilation of its inhabitants. 
Ultimately the whole of Bavaria was recovered except Ingolstadt, 
Schirding, and Braunau, which the Austrians still held. In 
November the allied troops were disposed in winter quarters, and 
Seckendorf, having completed his task, retired from the command. 
The French army on the Rhine attempted nothing after the capture 
of Freiburg, which cost them a three months’ siege. ‘The Breisgau, 
which had belonged to the Hapsburgs since the 14th century, 
passed for a few months into the hands of France. In the 
Netherlands nothing of importance took place after Louis XV.’s 
departure. The Pragmatic Army, with its triplet of incompetent 
commanders, Wade, Nassau, and Arenberg, remained obstinately 
inactive, and allowed Marshal Saxe with a very inferior force to 
keep possession of the French conquests. 

In Italy the campaign of 1744 was in the highest degree in- 
decisive. According to the treaty of Worms, a combined attack was 
to have been made upon Naples. But this depended on the joint 
action of English, Sardinians and Austrians. Admiral Mathews re- 
fused to co-operate ; and Charles Emanuel thought more of his own 
interests than of those of his allies. His first object was to obtain 
possession of Finale from Genoa, but his attention was soon called 
away to resist a threatened invasion of Piedmont. 20,000 French 
under the Prince of Conti were combined with the same number of 
Spaniards under Don Philip. In April they took Nice and 
attempted to pass the Alps. But they spent several months in the 
siege of a small fortress called Cori, and in October the beginning of 
the rainy season drove them back into Dauphiné after they had lost 
nearly half their troops. Jealousy between the French and 
Spaniards contributed to bring about the failure of the enterprise. 


i ee 


A.D. 1744-1745. PROGRESS OF THE WAR. 367 


Meanwhile the defection of the Sardinians left the Austrian 
commander Lobkowitz to act alone in central Italy. In April he 
advanced from Rimini towards the Spanish camp at Pesaro. But 
Gages, without waiting to be attacked, retired into Neapolitan 
territory. The Austrians marched as far as the frontier of 
Naples and there, in accordance with custom, waited for instruc- 
tions from Vienna. Meanwhile the favourable moment was passed. 
Don Carlos, regardless of his enforced promise of neutrality, 
at once espoused the cause of his fellow-countrymen. ‘'Think- 
ing it better to wage the war in foreign territory rather than 
in his own kingdom, he entered the papal states and encamped 
at Velletri. On the 10th August, Lobkowitz made a night 
attack upon the camp, which was momentarily successful but 
ultimately repulsed after a desperate combat. ‘The intense heat 
in the marshy plains gave rise to fever among the Austrians, 
and Lobkowitz, after losing more men by disease than by war, 
commenced a retreat which did not end till he had again reached 
Rimini. 

§ 16. In 1745 the aspect of affairs was entirely altered by the 
sudden death of the Emperor Charles VII. (20th January) before he 
had completed his 48th year. ‘The electorate of Bavaria passed to 
his son, Maximilian Joseph, who was only eighteen years of age. 
Maria Theresa had never given up the hope of recovering the 
imperial crown for the Hapsburgs in the person of either her 
husband or her son. As the latter was only four years old, there 
was no alternative but to urge on the electors the older but less 
popular candidate. Maria Theresa saw that the best chance of 
securing her husband’s elevation, and also of regaining Silesia, lay in 
a reconciliation with Bavaria, which might easily lead to peace 
with France. The young elector had declared immediately on his 
accession that he would not be a candidate for the imperial crown, 
but he by no means abandoned his claims to the Austrian succes- 
sion, and in fact assumed the title of archduke. There were no less 
than four French envoys at his court all urging him to remain 
steadfast to his father’s policy. On the other side were his mother, 
Maria Amelia, herself a Hapsburg, and Seckendorf, the Austrian 
renegade, who used all their influence to bring about a reconcili- 
ation with Austria. Maria Theresa lost no time in publicly 
announcing her desire for peace, but at the same time she gave 
weight to her proposals by military preparations. As the young 
elector, distracted by opposite influences, could not make up his 
mind, the Austrians commenced the attack. The Upper Palati- 
nate was speedily overrun: Batthyani defeated the Bavarians and 
the French, and the latter under Ségur promptly evacuated the 


8683 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. XVIII. 


duchy and retreated to the Rhine. Within a few weeks the whole 
of Bavaria was for the third time in the hands of the Austrians. 
At the same time the Austrian troops under Arenberg threatened 
to advance through Westphalia to Bavaria. The young elector, 
who had fled from his capital to Augsburg, was compelled to 
negotiate. Ftissen, a small town belonging to the archbishopric 
of Augsburg, was selected as a meeting place for the diplomatists, 
and there a treaty was signed on 22nd April. Maria Theresa 
recognised the deceased Charles Albert as emperor and his widow 
as empress: she restored to Maximilian Joseph all his father’s 
territories as they had stood in 1741, and withdrew all claims to 
compensation for the expenses of the war. On his side, the elector 
renounced all claim to the Austrian territories, guaranteed the 
Pragmatic Sanction, and promised his vote to the grand duke 
Francis. Until the imperial election was settled, Braunau and 
Schirding, with the strip of Bavaria on the right hand of the Inn, 
remained in the hands of the Austrians. 

Meanwhile the vacancy in the empire threatened to terminate 
the alliance between Austria and Saxony. France was as anxious 
as ever to prevent the election of the grand duke, partly on account 
of his Hapsburg connection, and partly because he was regarded as 
a personal enemy to France on the score of Lorraine. The most 
obvious means of effecting this object was to offer the imperial 
crown to Augustus III. as the price of his desertion of Austria, 
Frederick, though bitterly opposed to the elevation of Saxony, was 
compelled to support the French proposal. Augustus himself was 
averse to any increase of business, but his wife was eager to rival 
her younger sister who had married Charles VII., and his empty- 
headed minister, Count Briihl, wished to pose as the prime 
minister of an emperor. At Vienna the danger of Saxony joining 
France was fully appreciated, and great efforts were made to renew 
the recent alliance on a more permanent basis. Ultimately jealousy 
of Prussia prevailed at Dresden, and Augustus determined to adhere 
to Maria Theresa. But a great difficulty was raised by the king’s 
demand of a territorial reward for his fealty at the expense of 
Silesia. Maria Theresa was determined not to submit to further 
losses, and it took some time to arrange a compromise. By this 
Austria was to give up the circle of Schwiebus, but all further com- 
pensation to Saxony must be obtained at the cost of Prussia. On the 
18th of May a treaty was arranged to the following effect. The two 
powers agreed not to lay down their arms until they had conquered 
from the king of Prussia not only Silesia and Glatz but also a 
part of his inherited territories. As regards the imperial election, 
Augustus promised not to become a candidate himself nor to oppose 


A.D. 1745. BATTLE OF FONTENOY. 369 


the candidature of the grand duke: but he refused to pledge his 
vote, and declared that if the majority of electors chose him he 
would accept the crown. 

§17. The invasion of Silesia by the Austrians and Saxons is by far 
the most important event of the year 1745, but before considering 
it, it is necessary to turn to Frederick’s only remaining ally, France. 
Since the last campaign Louis XV. had conceived a passion for 
war, but it must be a war which could be waged without danger 
and with a fair certainty of success. These conditions could 
only be secured in the Netherlands. Accordingly three French 
armies were set on foot, one under Maillebois to assist the 
Spaniards in Italy, another under Conti to act on the German 
frontier, to defend Alsace from attack, and to watch over the 
approaching election at Frankfort. ‘The third and largest was to 
act in the Netherlands with Marshal Saxe as its commander, but 
accompanied by the king in person. The allied army in the 
Netherlands consisted chiefly of English, Hanoverians and Dutch, 
with only 8000 Austrians, the remainder under Arenberg having 
marched into Germany to threaten Bavaria. The experience of 
the last campaign had shown clearly the evils of a divided 
command, and it was determined to entrust the army to a single 
general, the duke of Cumberland, while Maria Theresa sent. the 
experienced Marshal Konigsegg to serve by his side. The Dutch 
troops were led by the Prince of Waldeck. In April Marshal Saxe, 
who suffered so severely from dropsy that he had to be carried in 
a litter, took the command of his army, and laid siege to Tournay. 
Louis XV. was present with his new mistress, Madame de Pom- 
padour. The duke of Cumberland, who could not be accused of 
want of courage, advanced to the relief of ’ournay. Marshal 
Saxe, leaving 20,000 men to continue the siege, occupied a strong 
position at Fontenoy, where a pitched battle was fought on the 
11th of May. The stubborn courage of the English, whose 
advance remains one of the great feats of war, nearly carried the 
day in spite of their general’s want of strategy. But they were 
ill-supported by the Dutch. Marshal Saxe brought up his 
reserves at the critical moment, and the attack was repulsed with 
great loss. The victory of the French decided the fate of the 
campaign. ‘Tournay surrendered on the 23rd of May, though the | 
citadel held out until the 20th of June. No more opposition was 
made to the French advance. The outbreak of the Jacobite revolt 
recalled the duke of Cumberland and most of his troops to Eng- 
land. The history of the campaign from this time is merely a 
list of successful sieges. Ghent, Bruges, Oudenarde, Dendermonde, 
Ostend and Nieuport opened their gates one after the other. With 


370 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP, XVIII. 


the capture of Ath on the 8th of October the French closed the 
campaign, They had scarcely reaped as much profit as they might 
have done from their victory, and they had certainly done little 
to help their ally. Frederick himself bitterly declared that the 
battle of Fontenoy might as well have been fought on the 
Scamander. 

In the east the Austrian army was once more entrusted to 
Charles of Lorraine, whose success in Bohemia had given him a 
ereat but, as it proved, an undeserved reputation. Traun,to whom 
the whole credit of the last campaign was really due, was regarded 
with jealousy by the prince, and was sent to command the army in 
Germany, which was to overawe the electors at Frankfort. With 
his usual want of promptitude Prince Charles delayed till May his 
advance to the frontier of Silesia. At Landshut he was joined by 
30,000 Saxons under the duke of Sachsen-Weissenfels. His army 
now numbered considerably more than 100,000 men, and was 
numerically far superior to the Prussians. But the latter had a 
great advantage in their unity and their undivided command. 
Frederick, as soon as he learnt the enemy’s design to invade Silesia, 
encamped by Schweidnitz at the foot of the Miesengebirge, or 
Giant Mountains, which separate Silesia from Bohemia. On the 
first of June the allies commenced the passage of the mountains. 
Charles of Lorraine had the campaign ready mapped out in his 
mind. He would manceuvre the Prussians out of Silesia as he had 
manceuvred them out of Bohemia. Frederick would retreat, the 
Austrians would occupy one strong position after another, and 
everything would go well. But it was one thing to carry out 
Traun’s policy with him to help, and another to do it in his absence. 
The hypothesis on which the whole plan was based was erroneous. 
Frederick did not intend to retreat. As soon as the Saxons, who 
formed the vanguard of the allied army, had appeared on the plain 
by Hohenfriedberg, they were attacked by the Prussians, and, in 
spite of a valiant resistance, were routed almost before Prince 
Charles was aware that a battle was being fought. When the 
situation was realised the Austrians were formed in order of battle, 
but it was too late to reverse the fortunes of the day. The 
Prussian cavalry, which had been so defective at Mollwitz, now 
carried all before it. ‘The Austrians were completely defeated, and 
had to seek safety in recrossing the mount&ins. Frederick followed 
them into Bohemia, not for the purpose of making conquests, but 
in order to support his troops at the expense of a hostile state. 

The battle of Hohenfriedberg was a great blow to Maria Theresa, 
and the conquest of Silesia seemed for the moment impossible. 
But the Queen’s courage remained unshaken, and she determined 


‘AD. 1745. ATTITUDE OF ENGLAND. 371 


not to give up the enterprise on the first reverse. Her great fear 
was lest the fidelity of her allies, Saxony and England, should be 
shaken, and her first act was to send an envoy to Dresden and 
Hanover to urge the prosecution of the war. With regard to 

‘England her fears proved well founded. The common interests 
which had led to the alliance with Austria no longer existed. The 
sole object of England in joining the war was to weaken France. 
Maria Theresa had now subordinated her enmity to France to the 
desire of humiliating Prussia, in which England had no interest, or 
rather the reverse. The Austrian troops had been recalled from 
the Netherlands, and the whole burden of the war had been thrown 
upon the allies. The result was the defeat of Fontenoy, the loss 
of the llemish fortresses, and the outbreak of the Jacobite revolt. 
English interests imperatively demanded the conclusion of peace 
with Prussia, and Frederick was not slow to take advantage of this 
turn in his favour. On the 26th of August he concluded the con- 
vention of Hanover with George II. England undertook to nego- 
tiate a peace between Prussia and Austria within six weeks on the 
basis of the treaty of Berlin. Frederick’s possession of Silesia was 
to be guaranteed by all the European Powers, and on this condition 
he promised to give his vote to the grand-duke of Tuscany. The 
claim of England to act as a sort of guardian to Austria, and to 
make terms in her name, was not likely to commend the conven- 
tion to Maria Theresa, On the 29th of August she answered it by 
a new treaty with Saxony. The two Powers again pledged them- 
selves not to lay down arms till they had accomplished their 
object. Maria Theresa undertook to send reinforcements from her 
German army into Silesia; and Augustus pledged himself to 
employ his whole forces in the war instead of the bare contingent 
of 80,000 men. English mediation failed altogether to effect its 
object, and the war continued. ; 

But before it could be resumed the attention of Europe was 
called away for a moment to the approaching election at Frankfort. 
In spring a French army under Conti had crossed the Rhine, 
occupied Frankfort and advanced to Aschaffenburg on the Main. 
The task of expelling the invaders was entrusted to the veteran 
Marshal Traun, who assumed the command of the Austrian troops 
in Bavaria, and was joined by the grand-duke in person. Traun 
advanced to the Main, where he was reinforced by Arenberg’s 
forces from the Netherlands. By a series of masterly marches and 
counter-marches, and without risking a battle, the Austrian com- 
mander forced the French to evacuate Germany ancl to recross the 
Rhine. The result of the election was now assured. The Arch- 
bishops of Mainz and Trier were devoted to Austria. 'The elector 


oe | 


372 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP? xvi. Pa 


of Cologne was gained over when it was certain that his nephew 
would not be a candidate. The Bavarian vote was secured by the - 
treaty of Fussen, those of Hanover and Saxony by previous 
treaties. This time no objection was made to Maria Theresa’s 
exercise of the Bohemian vote. The only opponents were Prussia 
and the Palatinate, the former at open war with Austria, and the 
latter completely under French influence. On the 13th of Septem- 
ber the grand-duke Francis was elected Emperor by seven votes. 
His elevation made no difference in the relations between husband 
and wife. Maria Theresa remained, by virtue of her natural 


qualities, the master-spirit, and in Vienna she was welcomed by iy 
the populace as the Empress-Queen. ; 

§ 18. Frederick had made great efforts to gain over Saxony as ‘¢ 
well as England after the battle of Hohenfriedberg. But the new . 
treaty which Augustus III. made with Austria convinced him that ’ 
he must resort to stronger measures. Accordingly he ordered the 4 
old Leopold of Dessau to form a camp at Halle, and to prepare for a 
an invasion of Saxony. But he still hesitated to give the final 4 


order, because Elizabeth of Russia had declared that any attack 
upon Saxon territory would be regarded as an act of hostility 
against Russia. The only immediate result of the preparations 
was that the duke of Sachsen-Weissenfels, with the bulk of the 
Saxon troops, quitted Charles of Lorraine and returned to the 
defence of his native country. Meanwhile the result of the im- 
perial election had encouraged Maria 'lheresa to resume hostilities. 
Before starting for Frankfort she sent orders to Prince Charles to 
drive the Prussians out of Bohemia. But Frederick himself had 
already determined to retreat. The country was exhausted, his 
troops were almost starved, and his treasury empty. On the 
29th of September he arrived at Soor, at the entrance of the 
mountains. ‘The Austrians followed close on his steps, occupied 
the surrounding heights, and determined to attack. Their position 
was immensely superior, their numbers were larger, and if the 
attack had been made at once it could hardly have failed to be 
successful. But the habit of procrastination was inbred in the 
Austrians, and their delay gave Frederick time to make his prepa- 
rations. He determined to be the attacking party instead of 
waiting to be attacked. The Prussian troops stormed the heights 
with resistless courage, and drove the enemy from their positions. 
Considering the circumstances it was Frederick’s greatest victory as 
yet, and reflected the greatest discredit on Prince Charles and his 
associates. But the results of the victory were small. Frederick 
could not and did not wish to re-enter Bohemia, and he continued 
his retreat with such rapidity that his camp fell into the hands of 


A.D. 1745. CONQUEST OF SAXONY. 373 


the Austrians. The Hungarian irregulars harassed his march, and 
inflicted considerable damage. At last he crossed the frontier by 
Trautenau and re-entered Silesia. Having no doubt that the 
campaign was over, and that the battle of Soor would force 
Austria to accept the convention of Hanover, he sent his troops 
into winter quarters, and ordered the Prince of Anhalt-Dessau to 
do the same. 

But Saxony and Austria were determined to carry on the war 
through the winter months, and to attack Brandenburg as well as 
Silesia. Great hopes were entertained that Russia, closely allied at 
this time with Saxony, would at last take part in hostilities against 
Prussia. Count Rutowski, one of the numerous bastards of 
Augustus II., had superseded the duke of Sachsen-Weissenfels. 
He was instructed to join Charles of Lorraine with the main army 
of Saxony, and the combined forces were to advance to the frontier 
of Brandenburg and Silesia. Thus they would cut off the Prussians 
from their communications, and could attack them at leisure. At 
the same time a detachment which had been sent from Tyraun’s 
army was to march upon Berlin. These hostile schemes were 
divulged to Frederick by the indiscretion of Count Briihl, and the 
king took prompt measures to meet the danger. [Berlin was 
prepared to stand a siege, and Leopold of Dessau was ordered to 
reassemble his troops at Halle. Frederick himself hurried off to 
Silesia to take the command of 4000 men, who were hastily 
collected from their winter quarters. As soon as he heard that 
Charles of Lorraine had entered Lausitz, Frederick ordered Leopold 
to invade Saxony, while he himself opposed the Austrians. On 
the 21st of November he crossed the frontier, and on the 23rd he 
crushed a Saxon contingent at Gross Hennersdorf. Prince Charles, 
as soon as he realised how matters stood, retreated before the 
Prussians to Bohemia, which he re-entered on the 28th. Mean- 
while Leopold of Dessau invaded Saxony from the north, took 
Leipzig without meeting any resistance, and advanced towards 
Dresden. Frederick now made a last attempt to induce Augustus 
to come to terms. As his overtures met with an evasive reply he 
continued his march from Lausitz upon Dresden, keeping a careful 
watch upon the Austrian movements. At the same time he sent 
urgent orders to the old Dessauer to advance with speed, and to 
attack. the Saxons under Rutowski wherever he might find them. 
The cautious tactician conducted his march with a slow precision 
that roused the anger of the king, but which proved quite effec- 
tive. On the 12th of December he occupied Meissen; on the 15th 

“he attacked the Saxon camp at Kesselsdorf, and won a complete 
victory. Two days later the king joined the veteran marshal, 


374 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. xvitt. 


and overpowered him with expressions of gratitude. The combined 
Prussian army was now nearly 80,000 in number, and was irresis- 
tible. Prince Charles had entered Saxony too late to support 
tutowski, and returned finally to Bohemia. On the 18th of 
December Frederick entered Dresden in triumph. 

It was obvious that Saxony must make peace at once; the only 
question was whether Austria would consent to do the same. 
Several circumstances combined to force Maria Theresa to give 
way. Without the Saxon alliance it was hopeless to think of 
recovering Silesia; without English subsidies, which would cease 
if the Prussian war continued, Austria was utterly powerless. And 
just at this juncture came news from Italy that the Spaniards had 
taken Milan. It was evident that if she prolonged the hopeless 
conflict with Frederick she must make up her mind to sacrifice her 
Italian provinces. The negotiations were hurried on, and on the 
25th of December the treaty of Dresden was signed. There were 
really two treaties, one between Prussia and Saxony, the other 
between Prussia and Austria. Augustus was to pay to Prussia a 
million thalers in gold, he guaranteed the cession of Silesia, and 
his wife renounced all claims on the province which might descend 
to her as the daughter of Joseph I. In return Frederick restored 
all conques's, and his army evacuated Saxony. Maria Theresa 
renewed the cession of Silesia and Glatz on the same terms as in 
the treaty of Berlin; conceded to Frederick the same rights that 
had already been given to Saxony and Hanover, and confirmed the 
privileges that had been assured to the King of Prussia by the late 
Emperor, Charles VII. Frederick on his side recognised Francis I. 
as Emperor, and acknowledged the validity of the Bohemian vote 
at the recent election. Both parties guaranteed each other in the 
possession of their respective territories, but Frederick’s guarantee 
extended only to the German provinces of Austria. Hanover, the 
Palatinate, and Hesse-Cassel were included in the treaty. 

Thus ended the Second Silesian War, which was much fuller of 
military incidents than its predecessor, but had certainly less 
decisive results. Frederick had immensely increased his reputation 
as a commander, but as a politician he had not been so con- 
spicuously successful. So far as he had embarked in the war to 
obtain territorial acquisitions he had failed. He had secured 
Silesia, but that was all. The real importance of the war is to be 
found in its effects upon German relations. The house of Hapsburg 
had recovered the imperial dignity. One of the first acts of 
Francis I. was to recall the Aulic Council to Vienna, and the Diet 
to Ratisbon. But it was certain that the imperial power, even in 
Hapsburg hands, could no longer be what it had been. The 


oo..* 


A.D. 1745. TREATY OF DRESDEN. 375. 


privileges which Charles VII. had assured to Frederick in 1741, and 
which were confirmed by the treaty of Dresden, practically released 
Prussia from its obligations and duties as a member of the empire, 
while it retained all the advantages of membership. From this 
time Prussia is not so much a state of Germany as an independent 
European power 


V. CoNcCLUSION OF THE War. 


§ 19. Maria Theresa’s obstinate preference of the Silesian enter- 
prise to everything else was as disastrous to Austrian interests in 
Italy as in the Netherlands. The Spaniards determined to make a 
great effort in 1745 for the conquest of northern Italy. They were 
encouraged by the active assistance of France, whence an army under 
Maillebois was sent to co-operate with Don Philip, and by the 
conclusion of a close alliance with Genoa, which had hitherto been 
neutral, but now espoused the cause of the Bourbons as the only 
means of saving Finale from Sardinia.’ Lobkowitz, the Austrian 
commander, had wintered near Rimini after the failure of his 
expedition against Naples. In, February the Spaniards under 
Gages advanced to drive the enemy out of the papal territories. 
Lobkowitz promptly retreated to Modena, where he received notice 
of recall, which had been too long delayed, and his place was taken 
by Schulenburg. Gages was still intent upon attacking the 
Austrians, when he was stopped by an order to march to Genoa in 
order to join the combined Spanish and French armies which 
Maillebois and Don Philip were leading in Italy. With conspicuous 
skill and courage Gages effected the difficult passage of the 
Apennines, and at Acqui joined the army from the north. With 
the accession of 10,000 Genoese the allied forces numbered neariy 
70,000 men. In August they commenced the campaign wih the 
siege of Tortona, which held out till the 3rd of September. Mean- 
while Schulenburg and the king of Sardinia had joined their forces, 
and occupied a strong position at Bassignano at the junction of the 
Tanaro with the Po. in both armies there prevailed differences of 
opinion as to the movements to be undertaken. While the French 
wished to reduce Piedmont as the best means of detaching Sardinia 
from the Austrian alliance, the Spaniards were eager to conquer 
Lombardy. On the other hand, Charles Emanuel was intent upon 
the defence of his own territories, while the Austrians made it their 
first object to resist an invasion of the Milanese. ‘The determination 
of the Spaniards carried the day with their allies, and after the fall 
of Tortona they marched against Parma and Piacenza which 
surrendered without resistance. On the 20th of September they 
stormed Pavia and now threatened Milan itself. 


376 MODERN EUROPE. | CHap, xvii. 


Schulenburg would remain inactive no longer. Leaving Charles 
Emanuel to defend himself, he hurried into. Lombardy to protect 
the capital. This separation of the Austrians and Sardinians was 
the very object at which the enemy had been aiming. As soon as 
he heard the news, Gages left Pavia and marched directly upon 
Bassignano. The Sardinian camp was stormed on the 27th of 
September: Charles Emanuel escaped first to Valenza and then to 
Casale, where he was again joined by Schulenburg. The French 
were now eager to prosecute the war in Piedmont so as to follow up 
the blow against the Sardinian king. But Gages was equally 
resolute to complete the conquest of Lombardy. On the 6th of 
October the Bourbon army laid siege to Alessandria, took the town 
in six days, and then, leaving the citadel strictly blockaded, 
advanced to the eapture of Valenza. Schulenburg had recently 
been superseded by Prince Lichtenstein, but the latter was unable 
to alter the fate of the campaign. Like his predecessor, he wished 
to enter Lombardy, from which he would be excluded if once the 
enemy seized Casale and Novara. But he was detained in 
Piedmont by the threat of Charles Emanuel that if the Austrians 
deserted him he would make a separate peace with France. The 
Spaniards were thus enabled to conduct their operations without 
risk. In November they captured Asti and Casale, and /on the 
16th of December Milan itself opened its gates, although the 
Austrian garrison still held out in the citadel. The Italian 
campaign of 1745 had been one of almost unmixed disaster for 
Austria. 

§ 20. These disasters were not unnaturally attributed by the 
Sardinians to Maria Theresa’s employment of all her forces against 
Prussia. There can be no doubt that matters might have gone 
very differently ifthe Austrian troops in Italy had been sufticiently 
strengthened. ‘Their inactivity was the unavoidable consequence 
of their weakness. It was no wonder that Charles Emanuel, inspired 
by this conviction, lent an ear to the offers that France was con- 
stantly making tohim. D’Argenson, the French minister of foreign 
affairs, had drawn up an elaborate scheme for the settlement of 
Italian affairs. The Hapsburgs were to be driven altogether out of 
Italy, and their possessions were to be divided among a, number of 
native princes. Underlying the scheme we can trace the first germ 
of a conception that has become familiar in recent times, the inde- 
pendence of Italy. None of the princes were to have external 
possessions, or to be subject to foreign states. In fact a special clause 
was inserted to prevent the union of Naples and Parma with each 
other, or of either with the crown of Spain. But there were 
several circumstances which ensured its failure. In Italy. there 


; 


AD. 1745. FRANCE AND ITALY. 377 


was as yet no effectual demand for that national independence 
which in this century became an object of passionate striving; and 
if there had been, Sardinia was not yet sufliciently developed to 
take the lead in satisfying it. Charles Emanuel saw clearly that 
the abolition of the imperial suzerainty, which had so long been 
exercised from Germany, would only establish a more practical and 
oppressive suzerainty in the hands of France. And for his own 
state the scheme involved immediate dangers. Two of the new 
principalities would not be really self-dependent. How could he 
make head against Charles of Naples or Don Philip, if the latter 
were backed by the two Bourbon monarchies of France and Spain ? 
As long as the Hapsburgs retained their hold on Italy, Sardinia 
occupied a secure and to some extent a commanding position, 
because it could hold the balance between them and [rance. But 
if the Hapsburgs were expelled and he incurred the displeasure of 
France, where could he find an ally to fall back upon? If the 
scheme was thus unacceptable to Sardinia; it was far more so to 
Spain. The ambition of Elizabeth of Parma was not likely to be 
satisfied with the very moderate principality offered to her second 
son. And against the will of the Spaniards, who held most of the 
territory conquered from Austria, it would be difficult to force on 
any settlement. 

But though Charles Emanuel was unable to accept D’Argenson’s 
proposals as they stood, he did not on that account abstain from 
negotiations with France. Austria seemed too absorbed against 
Prussia, and England with the Jacobites, to interfere in Italy. 
The citadel of Alessandria held out for the present, but if it fell 
there was nothing to prevent Turin from being besieged. Though 
he had no wish to see the Hapsburg power annihilated in Italy, he 
felt that if that were destined to occur it would be better to make 
terms for himself than to share the fate of his ally. On the 26th 
of December he went so far as to draw up preliminaries for a peace 
with France. Nothing was said of Italian independence, of the 
abolition of imperial suzerainty, or the transference of Tuscany to 
Charles of Lorraine. The only point touched was the division of 
the Austrian possessions. Sardinia was to have the whole of 
Lombardy on the right bank of the Po, and also on the left as far 
as Scrivia. The rest was to go, with Parma, to’ Don Philip, except 
a part of the duchy of Mantua, which was to be shared between 
Venice and Modena. Genoa might have Oneglia, but neither Nice 
nor Finale. January and February were spent in negotiations on 
these points, but a definite treaty was never concluded. Spain 
protested bitterly against the suggested terms, and opened separate 
negotiations with Vienna; and a complete change of circum- 

18 


378 MODERN EUROPE. Cuap. xvitt. 


stances was brought about by the treaty of Dresden, Maria 
Theresa, having ended the northern war, was able to spare some of 
her troops for the Italian struggle. 

_§ 21. In March, 1746, Charles Emanuel gave up his negotiations 
and again tookuparms. The Sardinian troops took Asti, and com- 
pelled the Spaniards to raise the siege of the citadel of Alessandria. 
At the same time Austrian: reinforcements arrived under Marshal 
Browne to join Lichtenstein. Don Philip had to quit Milan in 
haste on the 19th of March, and the capital of Lombardy was 
recovered for Maria Theresa, With startling rapidity the whole 
of Piedmont was re-conquered with the exception of Tortona. The 
Spanish army, under Don Philip and Gages, evacuated Lombardy 
and retreated to Piacenza. The Austrians took Parma in April, 
and prepared to crush the enemy at one blow. But the Spaniards 
were also aware that a critical moment had arrived. Conscious 
that they could not hold Piacenza much longer, they summoned 
Maillebois to their assistance, and determined to attack the 
Austrians before they could be joined by the Sardinian army. On 
the 15th of June the battle of Piacenza was fought, and ended in a 
complete victory for the Austrians, ‘The attack.was repulsed, and 
the Spaniards driven back under the walls of the city. Maria 
Theresa was so delighted with the news of the recovered glory of 
her arms that she at once gave up those negotiations with Spain to 
which distrust of Sardinia had impelled her. But the victory was 
not. attended with proportionate results. Lichtenstein’s ill-health 
compelled him to resign his command immediately after the battle. 
Military etiquette chose as his successor, not the ablest of his 
subordinates, Browne, but the senior in standing, the Marquis 
Botta, who had been envoy to Berlin at the outbreak of the first 
Silesian war. Botta was. unable to, concert any joint action with 
Charles Emanuel, and the allies were only saved from disaster 
by the fact that similar discord prevailed between the French 
and the Spaniards. . More than a month was wasted in inactivity 
or in fruitless manceuvres. 

While affairs were in this position, the important news arrived 
from Spain of the death of Philip V. on the 9th of July, and the 
accession of his only surviving son by his first marriage, Ferdinand 
VI. The first result of the change was the loss of power to the 
widow, Elizabeth of Parma, who had been absolute ruler of Spain 
for thirty years, and whose ambition had been one of the chief 
disquieting influences in Europe. ‘The new king was not likely to 
expend more of his country’s blood and treasure to obtain a 
principality for his step-brother. One of, his first. acts was to 
supersede Gages, who had shown conspicuous ability throughout, 


A.D. 1746. ITALIAN CAMPAIGN. 379 


by the marquis de las Minas. The Spaniards had already, thanks 
to Botta’s inactivity, been allowed to retire to Tortona. In spite of 
the vehement remonstrances of Maillebois, Las Minas continued 
the retreat. Garrisons were left in Gavi and in Boghetta, the 
bulwark of Genoa; but the main army of the French and Spaniards 
marched out of Italy by the coast. On the French frontier they 
separated, and the Spaniards entered Savoy, which they had 
occupied since 1742, and which Don Philip hoped to retain as a 
principality, even if he had to resign the hope of acquisitions in 
Italy. The Austrians:now advanced to the siege of Genoa, which 
had to pay dearly for its alliance with the Bourbons. Resistance 
being deemed impossible, the city surrendered unconditionally in 
September.. An enormous sum was demanded as compensation, 
and the citizens were treated with a haughtiness and severity that 
roused dangerous disaffection. Meanwhile Charles Emanuel, always 
looking after his own interests, made himself master of Finale and 
Savona. He had done hardly anything for the common cause, 
yet he was bitterly discontented at not receiving a larger share of 
the booty. 

§. 22. In the Netherlands the campaign of 1746 was far less 
encouraging to the Austrians. At the beginning of the year the 
French had every advantage on their side. ‘The duke of Cumberland 
had withdrawn the English troops and their Hessian auxiliaries, to 
crush the Jacobites at home. 1t was imperatively necessary for 
Maria Theresa to make a great effort to retain any hold at all on 
her western provinces. But it was an axiom of politics at Vienna 
that the defence of the Netherlands against France might safely be 
left to the maritime powers, and therefore she preferred to send the 
majority of the troops which were released by the treaty of Dresden 
to Italy. The result was that the allied forces were too weak to 
oppose the progress of the French. In January Marshal Saxe 
advanced against Brussels, which surrendered, after a brief siege, 
on the 20th of February. Antwerp was besieged in the presence of 
Louis XV. himself; the town capitulated on the 20th of May, the 
citadel on the 8rd of June. The French followed up their successes 
by the capture of Mons ‘and Charleroi.. Maria Theresa was now 
compelled to send reinforcements, while the victory at Culloden 
(16th April) enabled the English to return to the Continent. The 
allied army was raised to nearly 80,000 in number, and on the 21st 
the command was undertaken by Charles of.Lorraine. This was 
an error on the part of the Austrian government. Maria Theresa’s 
affection for her brother-in-law ought not to have blinded her to 
the fact that he had given conclusive evidence of incapacity. At 
the same time the appointment put a distinct slight upon. the 


380 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. XVIII. 


English and the duke of Cumberland, whose success in Scotland 
had made him a hero in the eyes of his countrymen. Charles of 
Lorraine attempted to protect Namur, but he was forced to retreat 
towards Liége, while Namur was taken behind his back. Marshal 
Saxe now followed the enemy, and Charles, eager to win back some 
of his lost reputation, insisted on fighting a battle in a disadvan- 
tageous position and with inferior numbers. The result was that 
he was completely defeated near the village of Raucoux (11th Octo- 
ber). But the French victory was not productive of any important 
consequences, and the two armies were soon afterwards dispersed 
into winter quarters. The whole of the Netherlands, with the 
exception of Limburg and Luxemburg, were lost to Austria. 

While the French arms were carrying all before them in the 
north, France itself was exposed to invasion on two points. At 
the end of September an English squadron landed some troops on 
the coast of Brittany, which attempted to surprise Lorient, but 
were repulsed without much difficulty. More serious was the 
enterprise in Provence. After the capture of Genoa, debates arose 
between the Austrians and Sardinians as to what further operations 
should be undertaken before the close of the year. “The Austrians 
naturally wished to carry out the provisions of the treaty of 
Worms, and to renew the attempt to conquer Naples, which had 
failed so lamentably in 1744. Charles Emanuel, however, who 
was not so anxious to aggrandise the Hapsburgs, wished to secure 
what had been so fortunately conquered. The difference was 
settled by the intervention of England. The guiding motive of the 
English throughout the war had been hostility to France. They 
now induced their allies to combine in an invasion of southern 
France. Their object was to crush the French maritime power in 
the Mediterranean, and this could be best effected by the capture 
of the great naval arsenal, Toulon. In November Browne led 
40,000 Austrian and Sardinian troops across the Var into Provence. 
The French retreated before them, and a third of the province was 
speedily overrun by the invaders. But the English still pressed 
for an attack upon Toulon, and for this Browne required heavier 
artillery than he had been able to bring with him. A request was 
therefore sent to Botta, who had remained in Genoa, to dispatch 
some of the large guns from that city. But the attempt to dis- 
mantle their fortifications was more than the already disaffected 
Genoese could endure. A revolt broke out, which speedily attained 
such dimensions that Botta, with the Austrian troops, was driven 
to retire into Lombardy. This event decided the campaign in 
Provence. Marshal Belleisle, who had superseded Maillebois, 
received reinforcements from the army in Flanders, and was enabled 


A.D. 1746-1747. NEGOTIATIONS. 381 


to take the orfensive. Browne had to give up the enterprise as 
hopeless, and in February, 1747, the Austrians and Sardinians 
re-crossed the Var and evacuated the territory of France. 

In the winter of 1746-7 the first serious effort was made to 
bring about a general peace by negotiations. It was natural that 
the lead in these should be taken by the Dutch, who had no very — 
special interests involved in the war, and who were terrified for 
their independence by the loss of the barrier fortresses, and the 
consequent danger of a French invasion. France also was inclined 
to peace. Louis XV. had gained successes in the Netherlands 
which his great-grandfather had found impossible. But France 
seemed no longer in earnest in its foreign politics. Conquests had 
been made, but no one dreamed of retaining them. Public opinion 
was not very much excited about the campaigns, whether success- 
ful or the reverse. The only general of conspicuous merit that 
France could produce was a German. ‘The court was more inter- 
ested in petty intrigues than in the interests of the country. Just 
at the moment when the result of so many years’ warfare was 
about to be decided, one of these intrigues overthrew the foreign 
minister, D’Argenson, who not only possessed more ability than 
any other French statesman, but also represented that hostility to 
the house of Hapsburg which had involved France in the war. 
His place was filled by the obscure and incompetent marquis de 
Puysieux. Besides the general indifference of the people and the 
Court there were other motives for desiring a peace. Successes in 
the Netherlands had been counterbalanced by losses in Italy and in 
the colonies. The English had captured Cape Breton, and it was 
feared that they might invade Canada. Breda was agreed upon by 
France and Holland as the site for a aiplomatic conference; but 
the negotiations came to nothing. England insisted on the admis- 
sion of an Austrian envoy, and Maria Theresa was determined to 
continue the war. Any project of peace was distasteful to her 
which did not offer to Austria some compensation for the loss of 
Silesia, and for the concessions to Sardinia. Such compensation 
was out of the question as matters stood, and in fact further 
sacrifices were demanded to satisfy the Spanish Infant, Don Philip. 
With the renewal of hostilities in 1747 the Conference of Breda 
was broken up. 

§ 23. Diplomacy having failed, Louis XV. determined to detach 
Holland from the hostile alliance by force. Two French armies 
were set on foot in the Netherlands. One, under Maurice de 
Saxe, confronted the allies, who were led once more by the duke 
of Cumberland, Charles of Lorraine having been sent to try his 
fortune in Italy. The other, under Lowendahl, a Dane, and 


382 MODERN EUROPE. CHap. xv, 


another of those foreign generals whose services were so useful to 
France at this time, commenced the campaign by attacking 
Holland. - French invasion in 1747 produced the same result: as 
the more famous attack of 1672. The people clamoured against 
the republican government, and demanded that the authority of 
the stadtholder, which had been in abeyance since William IIT.’s 
death, should be restored. ‘The aristocratic party was powerless to 
resist the popular will. William IV. of Orange, the great-nephew 
of William III. and a son-in-law of George II., was declared 
stadtholder of Holland. A few months later the office was made 
hereditary for his descendants, not only male but female. ‘Thus 
the constitutional monarchy which had grown up with the in- 
dependence of the state, which had once been abolished and 
another time had sunk into abeyance, was formally re-established. 
But if any hopes existed that the change of government would 
result in the repelling of invasion they were doomed to disappoint- 
ment. William IV.’s elevation resembles in some points that of 
William III., but it was all that the two men had in common. 
Lowendahl met with no resistance of any moment, and captured in 
speedy succession fortresses which had held out against the power 
of Spain. Meanwhile Marshal Saxe advanced to attack Maestricht, 
and was met by the duke of Cumberland at Lauffeld (2nd July). 
The battle was a mere repetition of that of Raucoux in the 
previous year. The French won a victory, but it was not sufficiently 
_ decisive to enable them to undertake the siege of Maestricht under 
the eyes of an army which, though defeated, had lost fewer men 
than themselves. The only result of the battle was that it 
prevented the allies from opposing Lowendahl’s advance. He 
received orders from Marshal Saxe to attack Bergen-op-Zoom, the 
masterpiece of Cohorn’s art, and regarded as one of the strongest 
fortresses in the world. After the siege had lasted more than a 
month, the French commander determined to attempt a storm. 
The very boldness of the plan favoured its success. The French 
climbed the walls by ladders, and the garrison was so astounded at 
finding the enemy inside their impregnable fortifications that they 
hardly thought of resistance. With the fall of this fortress on the 
16th of September the campaign in the Netherlands closed. 

In Italy the chief event of the year 1747 was the siege of Genoa. 
Botta, whose conduct had been so productive of disaster, and who 
was personally disliked by Charles Emanuel, was recalled, and 
Schulenburg for the second time undertook the command of 
the Austrian troops. He was compelled to undertake the siege 
alone, as the Sardinians refused assistance on the ground that all 
their forces were required to resist a threatened invasion from 


Oe 


AD. 1747. PROGRESS OF THE WAR. 383 


France. Genoa, thanks to the help which it received from France, 
held out for two months, and at the end of June Schulenburg had 
to raise the siege. Meanwhile the Spaniards under Las Minas and 
the French under Beileisle remained inactive in Dauphiné. The 
two commanders could not agree upon a plan of operations. The 
Spaniards wished to enter Italy by the Riviera, Belleisle by Mont 
Cenis; at last the marshal’s brother, the chevalier de Belleisle, 
obtained permission to attempt a passage by Mont Genevre. On 
the 15th of July, he entered the Alps, and on the 19th he was 
confronted by a detachment of Sardinians on the Col d’Assiette. 
After an obstinate conflict the French were on the point of 
storming the enemy’s position when their leader was killed by a 
bullet. This decided the engagement ; the French retreated with 
great loss, and no further attempt was made to invade Italy from 
the north. The campaign had not been very successful for the 
Austrians and Sardinians. The former had failed in their attack 
upon Genoa, and the latter had done nothing to recover their 
transalpine territories, which were still in the hands of the 
Spaniards. 

The military operations of 1747 had not effected any great 
change in the relations of the European powers, and the winter was 
spent in negotiations at Aix-la-Chapelle with little more prospect of 
success than those at Breda the year before. The chief represen- 
tatives of their respective courts were : for England, Lord Sandwich; 
for France, the count of Saint-Severin; for Spain, the marquis of 
Sotomayor; and for Austria, Kaunitz, who now commenced what 
was destined to be a long and distinguished career. In many 
points the negotiations at Aix-la-Chapelle recall those of Utrecht, 
especially in the leading part taken by France and England, the 
willingness of the latter to sacrifice its allies for commercial 
advantages, and the reluctance of Austria to accede to the proposed 
terms. The most difficult question before the conference was the 
demand of a principality in Italy for Don Philip. France, which 
had once made great efforts to bring this about, was now very remiss 
in its support of Spain. On the other hand, England, the ally of 
Austria, threw all its weight on to the Spanish side. The motive 
was the desire to advance commercial interests by making 
advantageous terms for trade with Spain and its colonies. Maria 
Theresa might well complain that the English alliance had been a 
costly one to her. In all the negotiations, at Breslau, at Worms, 
and now at Aix-la-Chapelle, England had forced Austria to make 
sacrifices. After seven years of war the queen thought she had 
done enough in giving up Silesia to Prussia, and great ‘part of 
Lombardy to Sardinia, without having to carve off another slice of 


384 MODERN EUROPE. Cuap. xvimt. 


her territories for the Spanish Infant. If Don Philip was to have a 
principality, let him keep Savoy, which he already held. This 
obstacle was fatal to the negotiations for a time, and, as no truce 
was arranged, hostilities were resumed in 1748. 

§ 24. This was a result which was not displeasing to several 
individuals, even in the states which were most desirous of peace. 
The duke of Cumberland, for instance, was indignant at not being 
made plenipotentiary at the conference. If he could not distinguish 
himself as a diplomatist, he would at least regain some of the 
military laurels which he had lost at Lauffeld. The Prince of 
Orange also, who had been made stadtholder by the anti-French 
party, was anxious to gratify his supporters and to strengthen his 
own position by a successful campaign. They gladly acquiesced in 
Maria Theresa’s desire to renew the war, and exerted themselves to 
strengthen the allied army. Great expectations were raised by the 
fact that Russia had promised to take part in the hostilities by a 
treaty concluded in 1747. In fact 80,000 Russians were actually 
sent into Germany; but the summer had arrived before they 
reached Mainz, and by that time the war had come to an end. 
Meanwhile France had realised that peace could only be secured by 
active exertions. If some great humiliation could be inflicted upon 
Austria, she would be compelled to come to terms. ‘This could be 
best effected, as Marshal Saxe was never weary of pointing out, by 
the capture of Maestricht, the last great fortress except Luxemburg 
which the Austrians retained in the Netheriands. Saxe united his 
troops with those of Lowendahl, and in April, 1748, the siege was 
commenced. ‘The duke of Cumberland advanced to Roermonde to 
attempt the relief of the fortress, 

But the fate of Maestricht was decided by diplomacy instead of 
by arms. On the 380th of April England, France and Holland, 
seeing no other way of effecting a peace, signed the preliminaries of 
a treaty at Aix-la-Chapelle. By a secret article it was agreed 
that Maestricht should surrender to the French on the under- 
standing that it should be restored to Austria. This was a con- 
venient method of forcing Maria Theresa to accept the proposed 
terms, Another secret article decreed that any power which rejected 
the preliminaries should forfeit all the advantages secured by them. 
The terms which were thus dictated to Europe provoked bitter com- 
plaints from the other negotiating powers. Kaunitz issued a 
formal protest in the name of his mistress. Spain, Naples and 
Sardinia found numerous details to carp at. But opposition proved 
futile in face of the resolute attitude of England and France. Some 
slight changes were made, but the preliminaries of April formed the 
basis of the important treaty of Aix-la-Chapelle, which was 


AD. 1748. PEACE OF AIX-LA-CHAPELLE. 385 


accepted in October by all the powers except Sardinia. On the 7th 
of November Charles Emanuel gave his signature to the treaty. 

All conquests made during the war were resigned, with certain 
specified exceptions. Don Philip received Parma, Piacenza and 
Guastalla as a hereditary principality, but if his male descendants 
became extinct these territories were to revert to Austria. The 
king of Sardinia recovered Savoy and Nice, and was confirmed in 
the possession of the portions of Lombardy which had been ceded to 
him by the treaty of Worms. The Prussian acquisition of Silesia 
was guaranteed. With these exceptions, the Pragmatic Sanction 
was once more formally confirmed. Francis I. was acknowledged 
as emperor by France and Spain. Genoa and the duke of Mod na 
recovered all territories they had held before the war, so that 
Charles Emanuei had to relinquish his holdon Finale. The French 
evacuated the Netherlands, and the barrier fortresses were restored 
to Dutch garrisons. To England were confirmed the commercial 
advantages with Spain which had been arranged at Utrecht. The 
Hanoverian dynasty was again acknowledged, and Louis XV. under- 
took to exclude the Pretender from French soil. The fortifications 
of Dunkirk on the land side were permitted to remain, but those 
facing the sea were to be destroyed. In the colonies the treaty 
produced important results. England had to give up Cape Breton, 
and thus lost its openiig towards Canada; but at the same time 
Madras was recovered, and the French were checked at a moment 
when it seemed probable that they, and not the English, would 
found an empire in India. 

Thus ended the second great succession war that had distracted 
Kurope in the 18th century. The most conspicuous impression 
that its history produces is of the immense decline of the power of 
France. Of all the grand schemes which Belleisle had proposed at 
the beginning of the war not one had been reaiised. No territories 
had been acquired and no military glory had been won. The only 
successes gained by the French arms were due to the genius of 
foreigners. Not a single general of note had been produced by a 
country which within the last century had boasted such names as 
those of Condé, Turenne, Luxemburg, Vauban, and Villars. The 
supremacy at sea rested with the English. By land the Bourbons 
are henceforth a distinctly weaker power than the Hapsburgs, whom 
eight years ago they had determined to annihilate. Only two 
powers emerged from the war with directly increased strength, 
Prussia and Sardinia. Prussia had established itself as a first-rate 
European power, had won a permanent military reputation, and, 
whatever the rights of the case, had kept a firm hold upon Silesia. 
Sardinia by its acquisitions in Lombardy had taken another step in 

18* 


386 MODERN EUROPE. — '  GHAP. ‘Xvi. 


advance towards the founding of an Italian monarchy. In a certain 
sense Austria may also be regarded as a state which had profited by 
the war. It is true that’ she had suffered territorial losses, but 
these were as nothing when compared with the dangers that had 
threatened her at the outbreak of hostilities. Fleury’s declaration 
that “the house of Austria has ceased to exist” had some founda- 
tion when it was uttered; in 1748 its absurdity was manifest to the 
world: Of the immediate results of the war the most important 
were the weakening of the close alliance between Austria and 
England which had been formed to resist the aggressions of Louis 
XIV., and had now lasted more than seventy years, and the bitter 
personal enmity between Maria Theresa and Frederick the Great, 
which becomes for a time the centre-point of European politics. 


VI. Roussta AND THE NorTHERN STATES DURING THE WAR OF 
THE AUSTRIAN SUCCESSION. 


§ 25. The death of Peter II., in 1730, extinguished the male des- 
cendants of Peter the Great.. Two of his daughters by his second 
wife, Catharine I., were still living, Anne married to Charles 
Frederick of Holstein-Gottorp, and Elizabeth, who was unmarried. 
But these were both passed over in favour of the descendants of 
Peter's elder brother Iwan. Iwan had also left two daughters, 
Anne of Courland, and Catharine, duchess of Mecklenburg, who 
had died, and whose daughter, another Anne, was married to 
Antony Ulric of Brunswick-Wolfenbiittel.. The crown of the Czars 
passed in 1730 to Anne of Courland, who pledged herself to accept 
a constitution which she speedily overthrew. Anne’s reign (L730— 
1740) is remarkable chiefly for the subjection of Russia to: German 
ministers. The chief power was exercised’ by her personal 
favourite, Biren, for whom she obtained the duchy of Courland, thé 
rival candidate being Maurice de Saxe. In every department Anne 
admitted Germans only ; foreign affairs were entrusted to Ostermann, 
the army was commanded by Lascy and Munnich.’ The rule of these 
foreigners was advantageous so far as it carried out Peter the Great’s 
policy of forcing western civilisation upon Russia, but it was 
extremely distasteful. to the natives. In foreign politics the 
closest alliance was maintained with Austria both in the matter of 
the Polish succession and in the Turkish war, and Russia was the 
power on which Charles VI. thought he could implicitly rely for 
the maintenance of the Pragmatic Sanction. | 

But in 1740, just as the great question came up for decision, 
Anne died suddenly. She had chosen as her successor her own 
grand-nephew Iwan, the infant-son of Anne of Mecklenburg and 


A.D. 1730—1741. RUSSIA. -- 387 


Antony Ulric. The Germans were terrified lest without the sup- 
port of an actual sovereign they might fall victims to popular 
hatred. ‘To secure their position, Anne’s will gave the regency 
during the minority to Biren, who would naturally continue the 
policy of his late mistress. But this arrangement was very distaste- 
ful to the parents of the Ozar, the Germans split into parties 
as soon as the immediate danger was past, and Field-marshal 
Munnich undertook to effect- a revolution. Before the end of 
November, Biren was imprisoned and banished to Silesia, Anne of 
Mecklenburg was acknowledged as regent, and her husband was 
appointed commander-in-chief. Munnich was now all-powerful at 
court, and he had been alienated from Austria by the latter’s conduct 
in the Turkish war, and was inclined to ally himself with Prussia. 
Not only were Maria Theresa’s demands for assistance refused, but 
Frederick, who had now entered Silesia, received encouraging letters 
from the marshal. But these relations were not destined to last 
long. Munnich’s claim to supremacy was resented by the other 
Germans, and especially by Ostermann, who was inclined to support 
Austria. The regent was easily induced to oppose the man who 
had conferred power upon her. Munnich, haughtily convinced that 
his services were indispensable, thought to overpower opposition 
by offering his resignation. To his astonishment the offer was 
accepted ‘in March, 1741; his appointments were taken from him; 
and though he retained his personal liberty, all his political power 
was gone. This second revolution involved a change: in foreign 
policy. Ostermann, who now enjoyed the chief influence with the 
regent, prepared to render active assistance to Maria Theresa. It 
was to avert this danger that France and Prussia instigated the 
Swedes in the summer of 1741 to declare war against Russia, in the 
vain hope that they might recover some of the territories that 
Peter the Great had acquired from them by the peace of Nystadt. 
In September the war, which never attained any serious dimensions, 
was commenced by an encounter at Wilmanstrand in Finland, 
where the Russians under Lascy won a complete victory. 

In the winter of 1741 ’a new plan was devised for breaking off 
the alliance between Russia and Austria. The French envoy at 
St. Petersburg, La Chétardie, gave his countenance to an intrigue 
which aimed at the ‘deposition of the regent and the elevation to 
the crown of Peter the Great’s surviving daughter, Elizabeth. So 
careless and incompetent was Anne, that she took no steps to foil a 
conspiracy which was hardly a secret at all. The soldiers were won 
over to the cause of Elizabeth, and the Russian hatred of foreigners 
was a powerful: impulse in her favour. In the night of the. 5th of: 
December the revolution was accomplished ‘without difficulty and’ 


388 MODERN EUROPE. - CHAP. xvut. 


without bloodshed. The regent, her husband, and the infant Czar 
were seized in their beds. All the ministers, including Ostermann 
and Munnich, were imprisoned, Elizabeth was proclaimed Czarina 
on the spot, and the whole of the next day was spent in the 
ceremony of doing homage. She had lived a careless and dissolute 
life, but she had one great merit—good-nature. The sentences of 
death which were passed on most of the prisoners were commuted 
to perpetual banishment. Anne and Antony Ulric never returned 
to Russia, and their unfortunate son Iwan VI., as he is called in 
Russian history, lived in solitary confinement till 1764, when he 
was murdered at the age of twenty-four. Ostermann died in exile; 
but Munnich, whose spirit was unbroken by adversity and who 
made himself quite a power in Siberia, survived Elizabeth, and was 
recalled by her successor to St. Petersburg. 

§ 26. Elizabeth’s accession was a victory of the national party in 
Russia against the foreigners who had been introduced by Peter the 
Great, and had been raised to supremacy under the descendants of 
Iwan. In order to exclude the latter from the throne, Elizabeth, 
who refused to marry, chose as her successor Charles Peter Ulrich of 
Holstein-Gottorp, the son of her elder sister Anne. The natural 
impulse of the new government was to desert Austria and to throw 
itself into the armsof France and Prussia. But on the other hand, 
Bestoujef, who now became minister of foreign affairs, was inclined 
to an Austrian alliance, and France had compromised itself by its 
relations ‘with Sweder., Elizabeth, who was naturally pacific, 
offered to renew the peace of Nystiidt. But the Swedes thought 
that the recent revolution had weakened Russia, and not only 
refused the offer, but demanded the restoration of southern Finland 
with the town of Wiborg. It was impossible for a daughter of 
Peter the Great to resign any of her father’s conquests, and the 
war was continued through 1742. A Russian army prepared to 
invade Finland with General Lascy as commander-in-chief, and as 
his subordinates Keith and Lowendahl, both of whom won a repu- 
tation afterwards, the one in Prussian and the other in French 
service. ‘The opening of the campaign was delayed by a mutiny. 
‘The antipathy against foreigners, which had just been so successful 
in the capital, naturally extended to the army, where hardly any 
natives were admitted to offices. It was not without great danger 
and difficulty that Keith’s resolute measures put an end to the 
mutiny. In June the Russians entered Finland, and carried all 
before them. ‘The Swedes, led by an incapable nobleman, Loewen- 
haupt, made no resistance, but allowed themselves to be driven 
back to Helsingfors, where they capitulated to an army of about 
their own number, Never did a nation sink so suddenly and utterly. 


A.D. 1741-1743. RUSSIA AND SWEDEN. 389 


from that military reputation which had made the Swedes, under 
Gustavus Adolphus, Charles X., and Charles XIL, the terror of 
Europe. ‘The blame rests, in the first place, with the oligarchical 
government which had established itself in Sweden with the acces- 
sion of Charles XII.’s sister Ulrica Eleanor. She had died childless 
in 1741, and the crown passed to her husband Frederick of Hesse- 
Cassel, who was even more impotent than his wife had been. The 
nobles, being absolutely supreme in the State, split into two 
parties, which were known as the “hats” and the “caps.” Party 
rivalry extended itself ‘to the army, and rival officers and soldiers 
eagerly watched for an opportunity to bring accusations against 
their opponents. In these circumstances it is no wonder that no 
unity or courage was displayed by the Swedes, and that the 
Russians were astounded at the ease with which their conquests 
were effected. The humiliation of the Swedish army made it 
absolutely necessary to make peace, and in March, 1743, negotia- 
tions were opened at Abo. The great difficulty was that success 
had induced Elizabeth to demand further cessions of territory, 
and that she also wished to settle the succession to the Swedish 
throne. For this there were two prominent candidates, Frederick, 
crown-prince of Denmark, and Peter the Great’s grandson, Charles 
Peter of Holstein-Gottorp. The majority of the Swedes, especially 
the lower classes, inspired with bitter hatred of Russia, wished for 
the elevation of the Danish prince. They hoped that the union of 
the three Scandinavian kingdoms, Sweden, Denmark and Norway, 
might be able to resist. the encroachments of their powerful 
Slavonic neighbour. But the nobles saw the only chance of 
retaining their authority in conciliating Elizabeth, and therefore 
decided to offer the crown to her nephew. But Charles Peter, 
ambitious of succeeding his aunt and becoming the Czar of Russia, 
refused the offer. Elizabeth now suggested that the Swedes should 
choose Adolf Frederick of Holstein-Eutin, who held the bishopric of 
Liibeck. The will of Russia was accepted without further resist- 
ance. By the peace of Abo (1743) Adolf Frederick was recognised 
as heir to the throne, and Russia acquired the whole of southern 
Finland as far as the river Kiiimen. 

§ 27. The continuance of the Swedish war foiled all the efforts of 
La Chétardie to ally Russia with France and Prussia. But at the 
same time the chancellor Bestoujef was unable to interfere on 
behalf of Austria. In 17438 another complication arose. A con- 
spiracy was detected, in which the Austrian envoy Botta was 
supposed to be implicated. The conspirators were sentenced to 
exile, and Elizabeth imperatively demanded the punishment ot 
Botta. As Maria Theresa refused to treat her ambassador as a 


390 MODERN EUROPE. “CHAP, XVIII. 


criminal until his guilt was established, and as the necessary proofs 
were not forthcoming, an’ open quarrel broke out between the 
courts of Austriaand Russia. Frederick took prompt advantage of 
this to restore his influence at St. Petersburg. Elizabeth demanded 
one of his sisters in marriage for her nephew and heir, Charles 
Peter of Holstein. When Frederick refused this, the Czarina was so 
far from being irritated that she asked his advice as to the choice 
of some other princess. The king suggested the daughter of 
Christian August of Anhalt-Zerbst. The suggestion was adopted, 
and in July, 1744, the betrothal took place. ‘The princess was 
admitted to the Greek Church, and re-baptised with the name of 
Catharine, under which she was destined to become very prominent 
in the history both of Russia and of Europe. 

But this good understanding between Prussia and Russia was 
not destined to last long. The first cause of quarrel was Frederick’s 
intervention in Sweden. Jn December, 1743, Christian VI. of 
Denmark had cemented a close alliance with England by marrying 
his eldest son to a daughter of George II. The Swedes, in order to 
redress the balance of power, sought to ally themselves with 
Prussia, and proposed a marriage between ‘the heir-apparent to the 
throne, Adolf Frederick, and Frederick’s sister Ulrica Eleanor. ‘The 
marriage was concluded in 1744, but this would not have sufficed 
in itself to alienate Russia if Frederick had not used his influence in 
Sweden to foil the Russian designs; and reports were brought to 
Elizabeth that in his familiar conversation the king was in the 
habit of using scornful language about her and her lovers. A 
personal slight the Czarina could never forgive, and from this time 
she was inspired with the bitterest hatred against Frederick. It 
was this rather than any political motive that induced her to 
compromise the quarrel about Botta, and to conclude a close 
alliance with Maria Theresa in 1747. In accordance with the 
terms of the treaty 30,000 troops were despatched to Germany, 
where they arrived only to find that peace had been concluded, 
and that their services were not required. . But Elizabeth’s enmity 
to Prussia was not cooled by this ineffectual act of hostility, but 
remained to become in the future an important factor in European 
politics. 


CHAPTER XIX. 


THE SEVEN YEARS’ WAR. 


I. Toe DipLomatic RevoLutTion.—§ 1. Interval of peace; foreign 
policy of Austria; plan of Kaunitz. § 2. Kaunitz goes to Versailles ; 
the French court; treaty of Aranjuez between Austria and Spain; 
Kaunitz becomes chief minister at Vienna. § 3. Colonial quarrels 
between England and France; outbreak of war in America; England 
negotiates with Austria and Russia; convention of Westminster with 
Prussia; French conquest of Minorca. § 4. Negotiations between 
Austria and France; treaty of Versailles; Frederick anticipates attack. 
IJ]. OUTBREAK OF THE WAR.—§ 5. Frederick’s motives for invading 
Saxony; battle of Lobositz; capitulation of Pirna. § 6. The diet 
declares. against Prussia; alliance between Austria and Russia; 
negotiations with France; change in the French ministry ; attitude of 
England ; second treaty of Versailles, UI. THE War rRom 1757 To 
1760.—§ 7. The Prussians invade Bohemia; battle of Prague; 
Frederick’s defeat at Kolin; evacuation of Bohemia. § 8. French 
attack on Hanover; Convention of Closter-Seven; Prussia threatened 
on every side; Frederick’s victories at Rossbach and Leuthen. § 9. 
Policy of Pitt; Ferdinand of Brunswick drives the French across the 
Rhine; renewed treaty between England and Prussia. § 10, Russian 
conquest of East Prussia; dismissal of Bestoujef; new treaty between 
Russia and Austria. § 11. Frederick’s campaign in 1758; failure at 
Olmiitz; victory over the Russians at Zorndorf; defeated by Daun at 
Hochkirch; saves Silesia and Saxony. § 12. Ferdinand of Brunswick’s 
campaign in 1758; successes of the English by sea, in India, and in 
Canada. § 13. Choiseul becomes chief minister; new terms with 
Austria. § 14, Frederick’s position in 1759; the Russians attack 
Brandenburg; battle of Kunersdorf; capture of Dresden by the 
Austrians; capitulation of Maxen. § 15. Campaign of 1759 in 
Western Germany; battle of Minden; naval victories of England; 
Wolfe takes Quebec ; accession of Charles III. in Spain; the Schuwalow 
treaty. § 16. Campaign of 1760 in Silesia; disaster of Landshut ; 
battle of Liegnitz; the war in Saxony; battle of Torgau. § 17. 
Western Germany and the colonies in 1760; accession of George ILI. 
in England. IV. ConcLusion OF THE WaR.—§ 18. Exhaustion of 
the combatants; campaign of 1761. § 19. Family compact between 
France and Spain; fall ss fist England at war with Spain. § 20. 
England withdraws the Pr n subsidies; death of Elizabeth of 
Russia; Peter II. allies himself with Frederick ; accession of Catharine 
II. ; Prussian successes. § 21. Treaty of Paris ; treaty of Hubertsburg ; 
results of the war. 


~ 


392 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. XIX. 


I. Toe Dietomatic REvVoLUTION IN EuROPE. 


§ 1. Tue Treaty of Aix-la-Chapelle produced no immediate change 
in the relations of the great European powers. For the next seven 
years they remained divided into two hostile camps, England and 
Austria against France and Prussia. This division appeared to 
statesmen of the old school so natural and so consonant with 
political traditions as to be completely unalterable. During this 
period, however, a great revolution was working itself out, and was 
suddenly consummated in 1756 at the outbreak of the Seven Years’ 
War. This was no less than the cessation of the long-standing 
rivalry between the houses of Bourbon and Hapsburg, the breaking 
off of the alliance between Austria and the Maritime States, and 
the formation of a wholly new balance of European forces, France 
and Austria combining against England and Prussia. The indi- 
vidual who, more than any other, is responsible for this novel 
combination is Count Kaunitz, recently Austrian plenipotentiary 
at Aix-la-Chapelle, who returned to Vienna in 1749 to receive a 
seat in the Cabinet, and to direct the policy of Austria for more 
than forty years. He was at this time thirty-seven years old, and 
though he had the exterior of a fop and the habits of a sybarite, he 
must be regarded as the most successful diplomatist of his age. 

To an impartial observer it appeared that Maria Theresa had 
reason rather to congratulate herself than to complain of the 
results of the succession war. She had escaped the annihilation 
that at one moment seemed inevitable, and her arms had been 
fairly successful except when opposed: to the invincible L'russians. 
But, the empress-queen was more impressed with the losses she 
had suffered than with the dangers she had avoided. Valuable 
territory had been sacrificed to Prussia, to Sardinia, and to Don 
Philip, and all attempts to obtain compensation had _ proved 
unsuccessful. These sacrifices, and this is a point which was 
constantly present to her mind, had been exacted from her quite as 
much by the pressure of her allies as by the victories of her 
opponents. It was not unnatural that, guided as she was rather 
by feminine impulses than by statesmanlike calculations, Maria 
Theresa felt dissatisfied with the results of the war and inclined to 
try the chances of a new course of policy. In 1749 she invited 
each of her ministers to draw up an independent statement of their 
opinions as to the line of conduct which Austria should pursue in 
the future. The emperor Francis and the older ministers pointed 
out that there were three chief enemies whom Austria had to 
fear, Prussia, Turkey, and France, while several lesser. powers, 
such as Sardinia and the new duke of Parma, were eager to 


“ew 


A.D. 1749. POLICY OF KAUNITZ. 393 


aggrandise themselves at her expense. To obtain security in this 
difficult position, the first essential was to reform the finances and 
to strengthen and improve the army. As foreign alliances were 
also necessary, it would in their opinion be best to maintain the 
old connection with the maritime powers, and at the same time 
scrupulously to observe the terms of the treaty, so as to give the 
king of Prussia no excuse for renewing his hostility. MKaunitz, on 
his part, drew up a very different and more aggressive manifesto, 
which is important as the first clear statement of the future policy 
of Austria. He also admitted that Austria had three natural 
enemies in France, Prussia and Turkey, while she had four natural 
allies in England, Holland, Russia and Saxony. Chief among the 
hostile powers he placed Prussia, and he did not hesitate to declare 
that the first object of Austrian policy must be the recovery of 
Silesia. For this, however, the existing alliances were insufficient. 
The weakness of Saxony had been clearly demonstrated in 1746, 
when it had compelled the acceptance of the treaty of Dresden. 
Russia was for the moment a devoted friend, but no reliance 
could be placed on a country where everything depended on the 
whims of a despot. England was, of course, the foremost ally of 
Austria, but English aid could never be expected against Prussia, 
George II., as elector of Hanover, was well-disposed to support the 
Hapsburgs against the Hohenzollerns, but that in itself was enough 
to alienate the large party in England which hated the Hanoverian 
connexion and refused to accept a policy which favoured Hanoverian 
interests. At the same time community of religion formed a close 
bond between England and Prussia. In the late war the English 
ministers had merely used Austria as an instrument to humble 
France, and had never ceased to urge Maria Theresa to buy off 
Frederick by giving up Silesia. This conviction that the Kiglish 
alliance was useless against Prussia is the key-stone of the policy 
of Kaunitz. Holland, which always followed in the wake of its 
powerful neighbour, was equally out of the question. ‘Therefore 
the recovery of Silesia was absolutely hopeless unless some other 
ally could be secured in addition to Russia and Saxony. The only 
power which would be of any service in this matter was France, 
and the practical conclusion of Kaunitz’s argument was that 
Austria should use every possible means to disarm the enmity of 
France and to gain her over as an ally. ‘The difficulty of the 
problem was fully recognised, and the only method which the 
minister could suggest was to do something for Don Philip of 
Farma, who was Louis XV.’s son-in-law, and for whom the French 
wished to secure a principality near their own border. If he would’ 
give up his Italian duchy he might receive either Luxemburg or 


394 MODERN EUROPE. - OHAP. xIX. 


possibly Savoy. In’ the latter case Austria would have to 
compensate the king of Sardinia by resigning the Milanese to him. 
From this outline the motives of Kaunitz’s policy are fairly obvious. 
He thought little of the outlying territories in comparison with the 
German provinces which formed the kernel of the Austrian 
monarchy. He was willing to make any sacrifices in the 
Netherlands if only he could recover Silesia. The importance of 
this province to Austria was not to be measured merely by its 
wealth or its population. It was an essential part of the German- 
speaking provinces which formed the chief civilising element in the 
empire of mixed races. Any decrease of the Germans in proportion 
to the Slavs was a distinct danger to Austria. At the same time 
the loss of so extensive a province was a serious blow to the power 
and prestige of the Hapsburgs, as heads of the empire. Its 
recovery was essential if the imperial power, immensely weakened 
by ,the recent crisis, was ever to return to its old proportions. 
Another point, which had perhaps more weight with the empress 
than with Kaunitz, was that the acquisition of Silesia by a 
Protestant king was a great blow to the Roman Catholic influence 
in Europe. 

§ 2. From this time we can trace two parties in the Austrian govern- 
mert; on the one side, the adherents of the old policy, including the 
emperor and the chief ministers, and on the other, Kaunitz and his 
partisans. Maria Theresa, to whom the recovery of Silesia was 
naturally an object of ardent desire, was won over to the views of 
Kaunitz and determined to give him the opportunity of realising 
them. In 1750 he was appointed Austrian envoy at Versailles. 
There he was brought face to face with the enormous difficulties 
which confronted him. The French government was in a state of 
hopeless confusion. Louis XV., a slave to the most degrading 
vices, had altogether lost the popularity that had once given him 
the name of bien-aimé, and in 1750 a revolt broke out in Paris 
which was the precursor of future disorders. Madame de Pom- 
padour, though she was no longer actually the king’s mistress, was 
all-powerful at court, and secured her influence by ministering to 
the king’s pleasures. Most of the ministers were her creatures, and 
they were changed with a frequency that makes it almost impos- 
sible to remember the order of succession. The department of 
foreign affairs was transferred in 1751 from Puysieux to Saint- 
Contest, and on the death of the latter in 1754 was given to Rouillé, 
who had previously had charge of the marine. But these ministers 
had only a slight control over the conduct of affairs. Louis XV., 
averse as he was to the burden of business and incapable of forming 
a serious decision, took a puerile interest in the minutie of 


A.v. 1750-1753. KAUNITZ AT VERSAILLES. __ 395 


diplomacy. It pleased him to carry on private negotiations without 
any reference to his responsible ministers. Most of the French 
envoys at foreign courts had a double set of instructions, one from 
the government and the other from the king himself, and they often 
found it difficult or impossible to harmonise their conduct to both. 
This secret diplomacy, which has only recently been ‘investigated 
with any thoroughness, makes the French history of this period an 
almost trackless labyrinth. One of the king’s objects was to secure 
the succession in Poland to the prince de Conti, who was at this 
time his chief confidant. Kaunitz found it impossible to come to 
any definite understanding with the French government, although 
he succeeded so far as to gain the personal favour of the king and 
Madame de Pompadour. But while he was at Paris, Austria was 
able to come to terms with one at least of the Bourbon states. 
Spain, which under Philip V. had been bitterly opposed to the 
Hapsburgs, now took the lead in proposing an alliance. In 1752 
the treaty of Aranjuez was concluded, and was accepted also by the 
kings of Sardinia and Naples and the duke of Parma. Spain and 
Austria guaranteed to each other all their European possessions. 
A similar guarantee was arranged with the other powers, but only 
extended to the Italian provinces of the Austrian monarchy. It 
was hoped that this treaty miglit influence the court cf Versailles, 
but since the accession of Ferdinand VI. Spain had severcd itself so 
entirely from the Family Compact with France that the expectation 
was baulked. Kaunitz left Paris in 1753 and was at once promoted 
by Maria Theresa to be her chief minister. But the promotion of 
Kaunitz by no means implied the immediate adoption of the new 
policy. On the contrary, his residence in France seemed to have 
convinced him that his scheme was hopeless. He was now pre- 
pared to leave Prussia in undisturbed possession of Silesia dnd to 
maintain the most intimate relations with the maritime powers. 
But circumstances worked for him in an unexpected manner, and 
before long he was able to resume his plans with a better prospect 
of success. 

In spite of the alliance which had lasted fer half a century, and 
of the undoubted services which England had rendered to Austria 
in the recent war, the relations between the two countries were by 
no means harmonious. The Austrian government was displeased 
with the part which England had played in negotiating the treaties 
of Berlin, Dresden, and Aix-la-Chapelle, and with the hectoring 
tone that was so often adopted by English ministers at Vienna. It 
was in vain that George II. sought to make his peace by jaining in 
1750 the alliance between Austria and Russia, and by proposing the 
election of the archduke Joseph as King of the Romans. ‘The Austro- 


396 MODERN EUROPE. CHap. xx, 


Russian alliance had been concluded in 1746 really, though not 
ostensibly, against Prussia, but England was resolute in refusing to 
accept it in that sense. And the proposed election of the archduke 
proved a source rather of discord than agreement. Only thrce votes 
could be reckoned upon with security, Hanover, Saxony and 
Bohemia. Prussia, backed up by France, was openly hostile to the 
election of a minor. The other neutral electors might possibly 
have been purchased, but only by concessions which Maria Theresa 
refused to make. The negotiations were carried on for two years, 
but ultimately George IJ. had to abandon the project on account of 
the lukewarm support he received from the very power in whose 
interests it had been conceived. At the same time there were more 
substantial grounds of difference between the two powers. By the 
treaty of Utrecht, England and Holland had procured the cession of 
the Netherlands to Austria, but only for their own security against 
France. Special provisions were made for the occupation of the 
fortresses by Dutch troops, and for preventing any possible com- 
mercial rivalry. The attempt of Charles VI. to form the Ostend 
Company had given a clear illustration of the selfish jealousy with 
which the Maritime States were determined to upho!d their mon- 
opoly. The old provisions about the fortresses and trade were re- 
newed in the treaty of Aix-la-Chapelle. Maria Theresa was 
disinclined to sacrifice her own subjects to their overbearing neigh- 
bours. She refused to pay the subsidies to Holland, and in conjunc- 
tion with Charles of Lorraine, the governor of the Netherlands, she 
began to take measures for the revival of commerce. This at once 
provoked vehement remonstrances, both from the Iinglish and 
Dutch, which were in the highest degree displeasing to a sovereign 
who was accustomed to absolute rule in her territories. 

§ 3. If the hostility between Austria and Prussia is the most con- 
spicuous point in European politics, the quarrel between England 
and France, which arose out of conflicting colonial interests, was 
equally deep-seated and important. ‘The vagueness which neces- 
sarily existed about the rights of discoverers and settlers in the 
vast continents of America and Asia was certain to lead to 
disputes, and in the eighteenth century these proved a most fertile 
source of international contests. It was easy to admit the right of 
the first settler to a small island, but if a man planted a flag on 
the eastern coast of America, it was impossible to allow that he had 
thereby established a right to the whole territory from the Atlantic 
to the Pacific. In two opposite hemispheres the English and 
French found themselves face to face. In India the open war 
between them had been stayed by the peace of Aix-la-Chapelle, 
but it speedily broke out again in a new form as the two nations 


A.D. 1754. FRANCE AND ENGLAND. 397 


mixed themselves up in the quarrels of the native princes. This 
time the genius of Dupleix was met and foiled by the courage of 
Robert Clive, and in 1754 the French government decided to recall 
their enterprising but unsuccessful representative. In America the 
quarrel was more complicated and was less easily settled. The 
first dispute arose about the boundaries of Acadia or Nova Scotia, 
which had originally been a French colony, but had been ceded to 
England at Utrecht. Commissioners had been appointed to decide 
the question, but no settlement had been agreed upon. And still 
more serious questions were raised about the general limits of the 
rival colonies. By this time the English had established them- 
selves firmly along the east coast of what is now the United 
States. But the French held Canada and Louisiana, and they now 
sought to unite the two provinces by claiming the two great 
valleys of the St. Lawrence and the Mississippi. Their object was 
to coop the English up within the Alleghany Mountains, and to 
prevent any further extension of their settlements. The governor 
of Canada, Duquesne, sent troops to seize the territory of the Ohio, 
where they built Fort Duquesne. The Virginians and Pennsyl- 
vanians were ordered by the home government to resist this 
aggression. In 1754 George Washington at the head of the 
Virginian militia cut a French detachment to pieces, but was 
himself defeated by a superior force at Great Meadows. So far the 
quarrel was purely colonial, but it soon extended to the mother- 
countries. Public opinion was profoundly excited both in England 
and France. HRegular troops were despatched to America under 
General Braddock, but he allowed himself to be drawn into an 
ambuscade and his whole force was annihilated. The French, on 
their side, sent a fleet into the Atlantic, and a great naval battle 
was only avoided through a fog, which enabled the French vessels 
to escape from the English with the loss of two of their number. 
War had not yet been declared, but the English privateers did not 
scruple to attack the French shipping, on which they inflicted 
serious damage. 

War between England and France was now inevitable, and 
George II.’s fears were at once aroused for the safety of Hanover. 
/ The French were not likely to have the best of the naval war, and 
they were certain to avenge their losses on the sea by attacking 
the continental possessions of the English king. The treaty by 
which Hesse supplied troops in return for a subsidy had recently 
expired, and was at once renewed, in spite of the outcry of the 
anti-Hanoverian party in Parliament. But a more powerful ally 
was needed to oppose France, and there were only two powers 
which could give the requisite security, Austria, as mistress of the 


398 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP, XIx. 


Netherlands, and Prussia. Naturally George Il. made his first 
appeal to Austria. Now was the time for Maria Theresa and 
Kaunitz to decide definitely on .the policy they intended to adopt. 
If they refused to assist. England, the old alliance must. be finally 
abandoned. If, on the other hand, they acceded to George’s 
demand, they must resign all hope of an agreement with France, 
and therefore of recovering Silesia. For a moment they hesitated. 
They pointed out to the English ministers that Hanover might 
also be attacked by Prussia as the ally of France, and advised 
them to hire Russian troops with a subsidy. The advice was 
followed, and negotiations were at. once commenced at St. Peters- 
burg, which resulted in a treaty (September, 1755), by which an 
annual payment of £100,000 was promised to the Czarina Elizabeth, 
and she undertook to send 55,000 men to the assistance of Hanover 
if attacked. The English government now renewed its demand 
that the Austrian forces in the Netherlands should be strengthened, 
so as to oppose the threatened passage of the French. But Kaunitz 
and Maria Theresa decided to refuse the demand on the ground 
that the sending of troops to so distant a province would leave the 
Austrian territories exposed to invasion. from Prussia. Thus the 
first step was taken in the great change of diplomatic relations. 
The alliance between England and Austria, which had. been called 
into being by the ambition of Louis XIV., and had been cemented 
by the exploits of Eugene and Marlborough, was at an end. 
Nothing now remained for England but to appeal to Prussia, and 
Lord Holderness was despatched as envoy to Berlin. Ever since 
the treaty of Dresden, Frederick had been absorbed in the cares. of 
domestic government. He had reformed the judicial administra- 
tion with the help of Cocceji, he had improved the finances, and. 
above all he had strengthened his army. But there is no ground 
for charging him, as the Austrian ministers did, with cherishing 
new schemes of aggrandisement, like the conquest of Silesia. . On 
the contrary, his chief wish in 1755 was to remain at peace, and 
the approaching war between Iingland and France filled him with 
dismay. He regarded France as his natural ally, but he had never 
guaranteed her. American colonies, and he was not willing. to 
sacrifice his own interests for them. Moreover, neither party was 
very firmly attached to the alliance, France was not likely to 
forget that Frederick had twice deserted her cause in the late war. 
Frederick, on his side, resented the way in which the court of 
Versailles treated Prussia as a subordinate power, and was extremely 
unwilling to allow the French to make themselves supreme in 
Germany. They were now about to attack Hanover, and would 
certainly call upon him for assistance. If he supported. them he 


A.D. 1755-1756. CONVENTION OF WESTMINSTER. 399 


would be exposed to a triple attack, from England through Hanover, 
from Russia, and from Austria. The French would very likely 
involve him in the war, and then leave him to his fate. At this 
moment came the overtures from England, and a little later the 
news of the treaty which England had concluded with Russia. 
The latter decided Frederick’s conduct.. By accepting the overtures, 
he could rid himself at once of two formidable enemies, and at the 
same time keep the war outside the limits of Germany. Russia 
was bitterly hostile to him, but then Russia would never go to war 
without ample subsidies, and the mcney which had been promised 
by England could never be supplied from, the exhausted treasury of 
Austria. Accordingly, on the 16th of January, 1756, the Conven- 
tion of Westminster was agreed upon. England and. Prussia 
confirmed the previous treaties between them, and guaranteed each 
other’s. territories. They also agreed, in case any foreign troops 
should invade Germany, to combine their forces for their expulsion. 
This was the essence of the compact; Prussia was to. protect 
Hanover from France, and in return England was to give up the 
design of bringing the Russians on to German soil, 

Hitherto the French government. had carefully avoided any overt 
act of hostility against England.. But early in 1756 an edict was 
issued confiscating all English property in I'rance, and -at the same 
time extensive military and naval preparations were commenced. at 
Brest and Dunkirk. The English government, which was headed. 
at this time by the feeble duke of Newcastle, believed that the 
intention was to invade this country. Great efforts were made. to 
induce the Dutch to support their old ally. William 1V., who had 
been made stadtholder during the last war, had died in 1751, and 
the government was now in the hands of his widow Anne, a 
daughter of George II.. But the republican party was still 
numerous, and strong enough to carry a resolution by which 
Holland remained neutral. ‘the government, conscious that the 
national defences were in a lamentable condition, took the unpopular 
step of summoning Hanoverian and Hessian troops into England. 
In the end the panic proved groundless. The preparations at Brest 
and Dunkirk were only a blind. to call off attention from an 
expedition which was being fitted out at Toulon to attack Minorca. 
The duke. of Richelieu, the vicious .companion. of the king’s 
pleasures, was appointed. to command, and the fleet sailed from 
Toulon early in April. The island was entirely unprepared for 
resistance, and General Blakeney was forced to withdraw the 
garrison from Port Mahon, and to throw himself into Fort 
St. Philip, where he was besieged by the French. It was not tilla 
month had elapsed that Admiral Byng advanced to relieve Minorca, 


400 : MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. xIx. 


and then, after an indecisive conflict with the French fleet, he 
retired without having effected anything. Fort St. Philip had to 
surrender in May, and Minorca, one of the most important acqui- 
sitions of the treaty of Utrecht, was lost to England. The govern- 
ment, whose incapacity was the chief cause of the disaster, tried to 
throw the blame upon Byng, and he was condemned by a court- 
martial, and shot in the next year. The attack upon Minorca at 
last extorted from the belligerents a formal declaration of war, 
which was issued by England in May, and by France in June, 1756. 

§ 4. Meanwhile the imminent outbreak of a continental war had 
forced Austria to come to an all-important decision. If France 
carried out its intention of attacking Hanover, the Netherlands 
could not possibly escape becoming a field for military operations. 
Maria.'Theresa had refused to support England by strengthening 
her forces in the Netherlands. Neutrality would have suited the 
interests of Austria, but it was impossible for a great power to 
remain neutral while one of its provinces was occupied by foreign 
troops. The only possible way out of the difficulty lay in an 
alliance with France, which opened the additional prospect of 
revenge against Prussia. Now ornever Kaunitz must carry out the 
grand scheme which he had propounded in 1749, but which had 
hitherto proved impossible of achievement. The Austrian minister 
was equal to the occasion. In August, 1755, he drew up a state- 
ment of the offers which were to be made to France. Louis XV.’s 
son-in-law, Don Philip, was to exchange Parma, Piacenza and 
Guastalla, for a more extensive principality in the Netherlands. 
Austria would undertake to support Conti in his candidature for 
the Polish throne, and to bring France into cordial relations with 
Russia, Spain and Naples. The allies of France, Sweden, Saxony 
and the Palatinate, were to receive advantages at the expense of 
Prussia, and that state was to be reduced to the position which it 
had held before the peace of Westphalia, so that it should be power- 
less in the future to disturb the peace of Europe. France, for its 
part, was to renounce the alliance with the Prussian king, and to 
share with Austria the expense of the undertaking. The plan was 
approved by Maria Theresa without consultation with the other 
ministers, and was embodied in instructions to Count Stahremberg, 
who had succeeded Kaunitz as envoy at Paris. The magnitude of 
the scheme, which involved a complete revolution in the politics of 
Kurope, is best expressed in Kaunitz’s own words: “ A great power 
was to be convinced that the whole political system which it had 
hitherto pursued was in direct opposition to its true interests. It 
was to be persuaded that what it regarded as the only means for 
overcoming the difficulties with England, were really unsuited to 


A.D. 1756. FRANCE AND AUSTRIA. 401 


the purpose, and that it was pursuing a tadically false policy when 
it made the support of Prussia the central object of all its alliances. 
Nothing less was aimed at than to root up the old rivalry of France 
against the house of Austria, and to completely alter the national 
character of a whole ministry.” The plan would hardly have 
escaped failure but for an unexpec'ed combination of favouring 
circumstances, 

On the 29th of August, Stahremberg received his instructions, and 
two days later he made his first overtures to the court of Versailles 
through Madame de Pompadour. It was a great point in his favour 
that the all-powerful mistress, like Elizabeth of Russia, was bitterly 
enraged by the reports that had reached her of insulting expressions 
used by Frederick in private conversation. Throughout this period 
she is the chief opponent of the Prussian alliance and the most 
influential supporter of the Austrian policy. She induced Louis XV. 
to conceal the matter from his ministers for a time, and to entrust 
the negotiations with Stahremberg to one of her own favourites, the 
Abbé de Bernis. On the 3rd of September the two diplomatists 
held their first conference in a country house at Sevres. The 
answer to the Austrian proposals was by no means encouraging. 
The French king definitely refused to agree to any enterprise 
against Prussia unless conclusive proofs were given of a secret 
understanding between Prussia and England. At the same time 
he called upon the empress to combine with him against England 
as a disturber of European peace. The decision expressed in this 
answer forced Kaunitz to change his attitude. French assistance 
against Prussia was out of question. But it would be absurd for 
Austria to make war upon Hngland when the only reward which 
made such an enterprise worth undertaking was withheld. Kaunitz 
therefore fell back upon the idea of neutrality, and proposed a 
defensive treaty with France, by which the war should be kept 
outside Germany. On these terms Stahremberg recommenced 
negotiations, this time not with Bernis alone, but with several of 
the ministers, Rouillé, Machault and Séchelles. From d’Argenson 
and Belleisle, who were regarded as enemies of Austria, the affair 
was still kept secret. But it was obvious from the first that the 
new proposals had a very slight prospect of success. The object of 
France was to humiliate England: in a naval war England was 
certain to win in the end: the French must seek compensation by 
land, and this could only be done by attacking Hanover. Therefore 
the proposed neutrality of Germany was directly opposed to French 
interests. At the same time, if the choice lay between two possible 
allies against Englaud, Prussia could render vastly greater services 
than Austria, The latter had not only no naval force, but it was 

19 


402 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. xIx, 


so distant from Hanover that armed intervention there was almost 
impossible. Without rejecting the Austrian proposals, the French 
ministers determined to send the duke de Nivernois to Berlin to 
conclude a definite alliance with Frederick. Nivernois arrived in 
January, 1756, just in time to receive the first news of the Conven- 
tion of Westminster. ‘This was the turning-point in the negotiations 
between France and Austria. The French king and ministers were 
furiously indignant that the prince whom they regarded as their 
natural and necessary ally should have concluded a treaty with 
their hated enemy, and guaranteed that very neutrality of 
Germany which would foil the military designs of France. It was 
France which now took the lead in demanding the revival of 
Kaunitz’s original scheme for an alliance against Prussia. The 
negotiations between Stahremberg and Bernis were resumed on the 
old basis. But there were still considerable difficulties in the way 
of a complete understanding. The French representative insisted 
on reciprocity of action as an essential preliminary of the alliance; 
that is, France was not to do more against Prussia than Austria 
would undertake to do against England. But Austria was unable, 
from its position, to take any direct share in a war with England, 
therefore France would not join in any attack upon Prussia. 
Moreover France was willing to allow the recovery of Silesia, but 
was opposed to a complete humiliation of Prussia, which would 
restore to Austria its supremacy in Germany. Kaunitz saw that 
time alone could overcome these difficulties ; that when once war had 
begun, France would have to do more than fulfil the bare stipulations 
of a treaty, and therefore instructed Stahremberg to urge the 
conclusion of the general alliance, and to leave the details for future 
settlement. Accordingly on the Ist of May three distinct treaties 
between France and Austria were signed at Versailles. By the 
first, which was a treaty of neutrality, Austria undertook to remain 
neutral during the war between France and England, and France 
pledged itself on no account to attack the Netherlands or any other 
territory of Maria Theresa. The second was a defensive alliance. 
Both powers guaranteed each other’s possessions, and in case they 
were attacked by any foreign state, agreed to raise an auxiliary 
force of 24,000 men, or, if required, to furnish an equivalent sum of 
money. This engagement was not binding as regards the war 
between England and France. The third treaty contained five 
secret articles. (1.) Although the war between England and 
France had been expressly excluded from the previous treaty, 
Austria undertook to send the stipulated assistance to France if 
attacked by any foreign power as an auxiliary of England; and 
France made the same pledge to Austria. (2.) The allies who were 


A.D. 1756. TREATIES OF VERSAILLES 403 


to be invited to join the defensive alliance were, the emperor as 
grand duke ot Tuscany, the kings of Spain and Naples, Philip of 
Parma, and such other princes as might be subsequently agreed 
upon. (4.) The two powers pledged themselves not to conclude any 
new alliance nor to confirm an old one without mutual agree- 
ment. The third and fifth articles were merely formal. The treaty 
of Versailles was regarded by both parties only as a preliminary 
to a more definite alliance. In the months of May and June 
Stahremberg pushed on the negotiations with great vigour. On 
the French side Bernis pointed out that the principality in the 
Netherlands for Don Philip was a very small price for Austria to 
pay for the recovery of Silesia and Glatz and the duchy of Parma. 
‘lo induce France to take an active part in the war it would be 
necessary to cede to her all the Netherlands, except the portion set 
apart for the Spanish Infant. Kaunitz was quite willing to 
sacrifice the Netherlands, but he was conscious that such an increase 
of the power of France would excite the bitter hostility of the Mari- 
time States, and would probably alienate those powers that might 
otherwise be allies. He offered therefore to cede the whole of the 
Netherlands to Don Philip, with the exception of those provinces 
which had at any previous period belonged to France. But he 
insisted that none of these promises should be fulfilled until Silesia 
and Glatz were actually recovered for Austria, and he demanded 
that France should earn such great advantages by sending an army 
into Germany, and by paying ample subsidies to Austria and her 
allies. Although Louis XV. and Madame de Pompadour had 
practically decided to accept the offers of Kaunitz, a definite 
agreeinent was postponed on account of the prepossession in favour of 
Prussia which existed among the French people and was shared by 
several of the ministers. The Austrian government, on the other 
hand, was impelled to haste by the attitude of Russia. The Czarina 
Elizabeth had concluded the alliance with England simply out of 
hostility to Prussia, and in ratifying the treaty she had expressly 
stated that her troops should be employed against no other power. 
Vhe Convention of Westminster, therefore, at once annulled the 
treaty of St. Petersburg: Elizabeth not only refused the English 
subsidies, but was filled with bitter indignation. She determined 
to have revenge at any rate, and offered to join Maria Theresa with 
80,000 men against Prussia, and not to lay down her arms until 
Silesia and Glatz had been conquered. Nor was this the only 
loss to which the Czarina wished to subject Frederick. Prussia 
proper was to return to Poland, with the exception of Courland and 
Semgallen, which Russia demanded for itself. Saxony was to 
have Magdeburg, Sweden Prussian Pomerania, and Frederick was to 


404 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. XIX. 


be left with little besides the original marks of Brandenburg. 
Kaunitz was encouraged by so favourable an offer, but he was 
compelled to moderate the ardour of his ally, lest any permature 
aggression on the part of Russia should induce France to break off 
the negotiations. Elizabeth was urged to wait patiently until the 
alliance had been concluded. Nothing could contribute more to 
this result than that Frederick should put himself in the wrong by 
breaking the peace. 

Meanwhile Frederick, by means that were characteristic of the 
employer, had obtained sufficient if not complete information of the 
designs that were being formed-against him. The result was seen 
in energetic military preparations and the massing of troops on 
_the Prussian frontier. Austria was extremely alarmed at. this. 
Bohemia was defenceless, and any attempt to increase the forces in 
that province might induce Frederick to attack it. Moreover the 
government desired to postpone active operations until the next 
year, when the arrangements with France would be completed. 
But Frederick, with his accustomed audacity of resolution, was 
determined to strike the first blow. With great reluctance Austria 
had at last followed the example of Prussia, and commenced to put 
Bohemia and Moravia into a posture of defence. Frederick at once 
instructed Count Klinggraff, his envoy at Vienna, to demand the 
meaning of these preparations, and to ask whether it was true that 
an alliance with Russia had been concluded against himself. The 
demand was intended merely to obtain a decent pretext for 
hostilities. It was replied that Prussia had begun to arm itself 
long before Austria had done so, and that no such alliance with 
Russia had existed or did exist. On the 25th of August, 1756, 
Frederick received this answer from Vienna. On the next day he 
commenced the Seven Years’ War by advancing with his army, not 
as was expected into Bohemia, but into Saxony. 


II. OurTBREAK OF THE WAR. 


§ 5. That Frederick was justified in beginning hostilities there can 
be no doubt.. Although it was literally true that no alliance had as 
yet been concluded between Austria and Russia, yet those powers 
and France were diligently concerting measures which threatened 
Prussia with annihilation. If Frederick had remained inactive, the 
war would only have been postponed till next year, when his enemies 
could have attacked him at their leisure. It was by the help of a 
traitor that Frederick had obtained his knowledge of these hostile 
designs. Ever since 1753, Menzel,a clerk in the Saxony Chancery, 
had been in Prussian pay, and had sent copies to Berlin of all the 


AD. 1756. THE PRUSSIANS IN SAXONY. 405 


important documents that passed through his hands. Among 
these was the proposal for a partition of Prussia which had been 
communicated by the Russian chancellor, Bestoujef, to the Saxon 
minister at St. Petersburg. But while this discovery justified 
Frederick in attacking Austria, the same cannot be said for his 
invasion of Saxony. He was doubtless aware that Augustus III. 
and his minister Briihl regarded him with bitter animosity, and that 
neither they nor their subjects had forgotten the humiliations of 
1746. But nevertheless Saxony was not a paitner to the projected 
alliance against Prussia. Though both Austria and Russia had 
suggested that some share of the spoil might be given to Saxony, 
the consent of the government at Dresden had never been asked nor 
given. The motive for Frederick’s action must be found in military 
considerations. In the last war he had ample experience of the 
danger of invading Bohemia while Saxony was left free to act 
behind him, and he had also convinced himself that that country 
offered the best base of operations for an attack on the Austrian 
territories. He had also another motive. In Dresden were the 
originals of those documents whose contents had been divulged to 
him by Menzel. If he could seize and publish them he might con- 
vince Europe of the rectitude of his conduct, and prove that he was 
not the unprovoked robber and aggressor that his enemies loved to 
paint him. 

Frederick’s intention was to march through Saxeny into Bohemia 
before the Austrians had time to arrange any effectual resistance. 
But to avoid leaving a hostile army in the rear, he demanded that 
the Saxon troops should take an oath of fealty to him and combine 
with the Prussians against Austria. He relied on the well-known 
weakness of Augustus III. and the terror inspired by a sudden 
attack to lend force to this outrageous request. But the Saxon 
king had not fallen so low as to surrender his army without a blow. 
Acting on the advice of the French envoy, the Count de Broglie, he 
threw his troops into Pirna, an almost impregnable mountain 
fortress on the Elbe a few miles above Dresden. Here he could 
hold out until assistance came from Austria, or possibly also from 
Russia. This step, undoubtedly the best under the circumstances, 
was resented at Vienna. The Austrian ministers had wished the 
Saxon troops to retreat into Bohemia, and to join the army that had 
been collected there under Marshal Browne. They were afraid that 
the occupation of Pirna would prove only a preliminary to an under- 
standing with Prussia. The demands for assistance were therefore 
very coolly received. Browne refused to quit Bohemia, for fear of 
leaving that province exposed to a Prussian attack. When at last 
he consented to march to the relief of Pirna, it was only to effect a 


406 MODERN EUROPE. ‘CHAP. XIX. 


junction with the Saxons so as to facilitate their retreat into 
Bohemia. Frederick was well informed of his intentions, and 
leaving half of his army to watch Pirna, he advanced with the rest 
to meet Browne. At Lobositz the two armies came into conflict 
(October 1st). For once the Prussians failed to gain a victory, 
although they kept possession of the battle-field. The Austrians, 
who had displayed distinguished courage, were able to continue their 
march without further opposition. As the left bank of the Elbe 
was occupied by the enemy, they had to take the right bank, and it 
was arranged that the Saxons should cross the river to join them. 
The latter failed to perform their share of the operations, and 
Browne gave up the enterprise and retreated into Bohemia. 
Nothing now remained for the Saxons but to capitulate, which they 
did on the 16th of October. The officers were released, after giving 
their word not to serve against Prussia in the present war, but the 
common soldiers were compelled to join Frederick’s army. Augus- 
tus IIT. retired to his second capital, Warsaw, leaving his wife behind 
in Dresden. The unfortunate queen was compelled, not without 
threats of personal violence, to surrender the Saxon archives, from 
which Frederick compiled a mémotre raisonné in justification of his 
conduct, which was sent round to all the European courts. The 
season was now too late for an invasion of Bohemia, and that enter- 
prise had to be postponed till next year. By holding out in Pirna 
the Saxons had rendered an inestimable service to Austria. 

§ 6. The unexpected outbreak of hostilities forced Austria to hurry 
on the formation of the great anti-Prussian alliance. The first 
power that was gained oyer was the Empire. In September, 1756, 
the emperor Francis issued a formal declaration that Frederick by 
invading Saxony had broken the imperial constitution, and exposed 
himself to the penalties of such an act. But the personal authority 
of the emperor counted for little unless it was backed up by the 
formal adhesion of the German states. This was not difficult to 
obtain. France and Austria, which on previous occasions had 
pulled different ways, were now on the same side. This 
combination of influence was irresistible, and in January, 1757, the 
diet of Ratisbon issued a recess authorising the emperor to take 
measures for the compensation of Saxony and the defence of 
Austria and Bohemia, and promising to support him with an 
imperial army. The recess was opposed by Prussia and Hanover, 
but was carried by a majority in all three chambers. 

This manifesto of the diet gave more moral than practical 
assistance to the Austrian cause. The military organisation of the 
Empire was as distracted and powerless as ever, and for real help in 
the war Austria relied chiefly upon Russia and France. With 


A.D. 1756. AUSTRIA AND RUSSIA. 407 


Russia there was little beyond details to settle. Elizabeth, who 
had been raised to the throne in 1741 in opposition to Austria, had 
completely changed her original policy, and since 1746 had become 
the close ally of Maria Theresa and a bitter enemy of Frederick the 
Great. All her ministers, especially Woronzow and the powerful 
Schuwalow family, were on the same side. The only persons from 
whom opposition might be dreaded were the Chancellor Bestoujef, 
who was known to have been corrupted by English bribes, and the 
heir-apparent, Peter of Holstein, who was a devoted admirer of 
Frederick. There was a constant risk that Elizabeth’s death might 
bring about a complete change in the attitude of Russia. ‘This was 
an additional reason for hastening the negotiations. On the 11th 
of January, 1757, the Convention of St. Petersburg was signed, by 
which Russia accepted the defensive treaty of Versailles between 
Austria and France, although, to satisfy the scruples of the latter 
power, its provisions were not to be enforced in case of a war with 
Turkey or Persia. Three weeks later, on the 2nd of February, an 
offensive alliance against Prussia was arranged between Russia and 
Austria. Both powers pledged themselves to bring 80,000 men 
into the field, and not to lay down their arms until Silesia and 
Glatz had been wrested from Frederick. ‘They also agreed to 
reduce the power of Prussia within such limits that it should no 
longer be formidable to the peace of Europe. Sweden and 
Denmark were to be induced to join the alliance by the offer of 
territorial advantages, and Saxony was to receive as compensation 
the district of Magdeburg. Maria Theresa undertook to: pay to 
Russia an annual subsidy of a million roubles during the 
continuance of the war. An army had already been assembled at 
Riga under Apraxin, but military affairs were so ill-organised in 
Russia that it was doubtful whether it could commence operations 
with any promptness. 

It now only remained for Austria to bring its negotiations with 
France to a satisfactory conclusion. The whole situation was 
altered by Frederick’s invasion of Saxony. The court of Versailles 
was extremely indignant, especially as the injured king was the 
father-in-law of the dauphin. The outbreak of war at once 
brought: into operation the defensive alliance that had been 
concluded in May, and Louis XV. offered to send the stipulated 
24,000 troops to the assistance of Austria. But at the same. time 
the chief obstacle was removed in the way of the offensive alliance 
which was already being negotiated by Stahremberg. France was 
no longer unwilling to impose further losses upon Prussia besides 
Silesia and Glatz. The negotiations. were pressed on with 
redoubled rigour, but there were still endless difficulties, in the 


408 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. XIx. 


discussion of which several valuable months were spent. One of 
these lay in the relations into which France was necessarily 
brought with Russia. Ifthe Russian troops attacked Prussia they 
would have to march through Poland, and for some time it had 
been a prominent object of French policy to oppose the growth of 
Russian influence in that country. That Louis XV. gave way on 
this point exposes him to considerable responsibility for the 
subsequent partition of Poland. Another considerable dispute 
arose about that part of the Netherlands which was to be cut off 
from tne principality of Don Philip and ceded to France. The 
French demanded that the two ports of Ostend and Nieuport - 
should be included, to which Austria was opposed on the ground 
that it would excite most vehement hostility on the part of 
England and Holland. But the great source of difficulty lay in the 
divergent objects of the two powers. ‘l'o Austria the chief enemy 
was Prussia, for whose humiliation every effort was to be made. 
French hostility, on the other hand, was directed in the first place 
against England. It was proposed that the French army, instead 
of marching to the assistance of Saxony or Bohemia, should first 
attack Hanover, and thence invade Prussia from the West. This 
was extremely distasteful at Vienna. In the first place the treaty 
of Versailles had expressly excluded the war between France and 
England, so that, while France was bound to oppose Prussia, 
Austria had undertaken no such stipulation with regard to 
England. Besides, there were very grave arguments against the 
attack upon Hanover. The very crime of which Frederick was 
accused, the attack upon a member of the empire, would then 
be committed by the Hapsburgs, whose position bound them to 
enforce the imperial laws. And it was probable that the French 
troops would find sufficient occupation in Hanover to prevent them 
trom taking any part in the combined attack upon Prussia. Maria 
Theresa’s object was to induce George II. to arrange for the 
neutrality of Hanover as he had done in the former war, and this 
not unnaturally provoked a suspicion in France that Austria was 
still:inclined to favour English interests. 

External events helped to remove some of these obstacles. 
While the Hanoverian ministers were inclined to fall in with the 
suggestions of Austria, public opinion in England, always hostile to 
the connection with Hanover, was eager to throw the country 
definitely on to the side of Prussia. In November, 1756, the feeble 
ministry of Newcastle retired, and the king was compelled to 
confide in William Pitt, the representative of the popular voice and 
the greatest war minister that England has ever produced. The 
result of the ministerial change was seen in the tone of the king’s 


756-1757. SECOND TREATY OF VERSAILLES. 409 


speech at the opening of Parliament in February. It expressed the 
most bitter antipathy to I’rance, and the determination to support 
Prussia at all costs. This declaration of English policy exasperated 
Maria Theresa, and rendered her willing to comply with the wishes 
of France. Matters were still more facilitated by a change in the 
French ministry. In January a madman named Damiens stabbed 
Louis XV. with a knife. The wound was never dangerous, but the 
king was terrified lest the weapon might have been poisoned, and 
took to his bed. The court at once deserted Madame de 
Pompadour to surround the dauphin, and though the king’s 
recovery speedily restored her to her old position, she had seen the 
weakness of her position and determined to strengthen it by 
removing those ministers she could not fully trust. Both 
d’Argenson, who had always ranked as her opponent, and Machault, 
the minister of marine, who had hitherto been one of her 
supporters, received their dismissal. The latter was sacrificed to 
the enmity of the Parliament of Paris which had been aroused by 
his daring financial reforms and his attack upon antiquated 
privileges. One result of these changes was. the admission 
into the ministry of the Abbé de Bernis, who had played the most 
prominent part in conducting the negotiations with Stahremberg. 
From this time he, with Madame de Pompadour and Belleisle, who 
had now completely abandoned his policy of antagonism to Austria, 
exercised the chief influence on the direction of French policy. 
These two events, the avowal of England’s determination to 
support Prussia, and the changes in the French ministry, facilitated 
the work of Stahremberg, and enabled him to conclude the second 
treaty of Versailles on the 1st of May, 1757. France undertook 
to pay to Austria a subsidy of twelve million gulden a year, to 
take into her service 6000 Wurtembergers and 4000 Bavarians, 
and to bring into the field 105,000 troops of her own. These 
exertions were to be continued not only till Silesia and Glatz had 
been conquered; but until Prussia had definitely given them up by 
a formal treaty. Other provinces were to be extorted from Prussia, 
but were not equally insisted upon. The principality of Crossen 
and some other territory not definitely specified were to be ‘added 
to the Austrian share ; Magdeburg, Halle and Halberstadt were to 
be given to Saxony ; Pomerania to Sweden; Prussian Cleve to the 
Elector Palatine; Gelderland to Holland. The obvious intention 
was to deprive Brandenburg of all the acquisitions that had been 
made by the Great Elector and his successors. Austria, on her 
side, promised to hand over to Don Philip in exchange for his 
Italian duchy the whole of the Netherlands, except Ostend, 
Nieuport, Ypres, and other districts, which were to go to France ; 
19* 


410 MODERN EUROPE. Cap. xix. 


but this obligation was not binding until Silesia and Glatz were 
acquired. Ostend and Nieuport were to be placed in French ocecu- 
pation directly the first subsidy was paid, but were to be restored 
if the enterprise proved unsuccessful. Also Austria renounced all 
previous alliances with England, as France did with Prussia. If 
the duke of Parma accepted the Netherlands, his claims to the 
Two Sicilies were to revert to the descendants of the present king 
of Naples, who was to resign the ‘Tuscan stato degli presidii to 
Austria. 

Thus was completed the great diplomatic revolution which 
Kaunitz had been the first to suggest, but which had appeared for 
years to be a chimerical dream. France had at last given up its 
traditional enmity to the house of Hapsburg, and had allicd itself 
with Austria against a German power, which it had hitherto been 
the grand object of French policy to support. The Abbé de Bernis 
had reversed all the plans of Richelieu. The treaty had not been 
concluded without a considerable strife of interests, but there can 
be no doubt that the ultimate terms were to the advantage of 
Austria. It is usual to assert that in the alliance against Prussia 
religious motives regained an ascendency in Europe which they 
had lost since the treaty of Westphalia. But this aspect of the 
Seven Years’ War has unquestionably been exaggerated, mainly 
through the influence of Frederick himself, who loved to represent 
himself as the champion of Protestantism against Catholic in- 
tolerance. Louis XV. and Maria Theresa were both superstitious 
and bigoted enough to have embarked upon a war of persecution. 
But Kaunitz, the real author of the alliance, was a philosopher 
rather than a devotee, and it is absurd to regard as essentially 
Roman Catholic a league which included Russia and Sweden, as 
well as several of the Protestant states of Germany. All that can 
be said of the Seven Years’ War is that religion had some influence 
in directing the partiality of states for one side or the other, but 
the real guiding motives were as purely political: and secular as in 
the war of the Spanish succession. 


III. Tuz War ¥rrom 1757 tro 1760. 


§ 7. Great preparations were made by Frederick and his opponents 
to make the campaign of 1757 decisive. In Vienna it was deemed 
certain that a concerted attack upon Prussia from Bohemia by the 
Austrians, from Westphalia by the French, from the south by the 
army of the Empire, and from the north by the Swedes and 

Russians, must force Frederick to relinquish his hold on Silesia and 
Saxony, and to make peace on humiliating terms. England, at 


A.D. 1757. PRAGUE AND KOLIN. 411 


most, could only ward off the French attack by holding Hanover 
against invasion. As usual, Frederick’s superior activity enabled 
him to disconcert hisenemies. Instead of standing on the defensive, 
he determined to resume the enterprise of the last year and invade 
Bohemia. By the end of April the Prussian army had crossed the 
frontier. The defence of. the province was no longer in the hands 
of Marshal Browne. The bitter experience of the succession war 
had not sufficed to overcome Maria Theresa’s partiality for her 
brother-in-law, and Charles of Lorraine was allowed to give new 
proofs of his incapacity. By his o:ders Browne made no opposition 
to the Prussians, but retreated from point to point upon Prague. 
Here at last it was necessary to make a stand, and the position 
seemed favourable enough to ensure success. Frederick, who had. 
marched steadily after the retreating enemy, was determined on a 
battle, and without allowing any rest to his troops, he attacked the 
Austrian intrenchments on the 6th of May. The engagement 
was the bloodiest that had been fought in Europe since Malplaquet. 
Schwerin, the hero of Mollwitz, was killed on the field, and Browne 
received a wound that proved mortal. The losses on each side 
were nearly equal, but the Prussians carried the day. The larger 
part of the Austrian army sought refuge within the walls of Prague, 
and the rest escaped southwards to join Daun, who was bringing up 
reinforcements. 

Frederick at once laid siege to Prague, and if he could have taken 
it at once might have defeated Daun, and crushed all opposition in 
Bohemia. But the large number of defenders made a storm 
hopeless, and it was necessary to resort to the slower process: of 
blockade. Twenty thousand men were detached under the duke 
-of Brunswick-Bevern to prevent any attempt to relieve the city. 
But Prague held out, and the delay enabled Daun to receive reinforce- 
ments. When his army was about 54,000 strong, he turned upon 
Bevern, before whom he had hitherto retreated. Frederick had now 
to decide whether he would raise the siege or wait to be attacked, 
or whether he would stick to his enterprise, and also meet Daun 
in the field. Unfortunately he chose the latter alternative. Leaving 
the bulk of his forces to maintain the blockade, he hurried off to 
join Bevern with only 14,000 men. His recent success had inspired 
him with contempt for his foes. At Kolin (June 18) the superior 
numbers of the Austrians gave them a complete victory. Frederick 
had to give up his enterprise as hopeless. The siege of Prague was 
raised, and in two detachments the Prussian army quitted Bohemia. 
Frederick himself made good his retreat into Saxony ; but the other 
portion of his. army, which was led. by his: brother - Augustus 
William, suffered very serious loss on its march into Lausitz. 


412 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. xIx, 


Charles of Lorraine followed him across the frontier, and took the 
town of Zittau. But here the Austrian advance was checked. 
Charles ought to have completely crushed the detachment which 
he was content to pursue. Frederick now joined his brother, and 
the Prussians regained their numerical superiority. The Austrians 
had to stand on the defensive at Zittau, but their position was too 
strong for Frederick to attack them. The victory of Kolin, decisive 
as it was, produced no other immediate result than the expulsion of 
the Prussians from Bohemia. 

§ 8. But the victory had more important indirect results. On every 
side Frederick’s enemies were encouraged to attack him, and his 
destruction seem7d almost certainly imminent. Early in the year 
a large French army under Marshal d’Estrées had marched upon 
Hanover, with the intention of invading Brandenburg from the 
west. ‘They were opposed by a mixed force of English, Hanoverians 
and Hessians, under the duke of Cumberland, who had won a 
reputation at Culloden, but had never been otherwise than unfortu- 
nate on the continent. At Hastenbeck (July 26) he was defeated, 
though indecisively, by the French, and retreated northwards to 
Stade. D’Estrées was superseded by the incompetent duke de 
Richelieu, who reaped the profit’ of his predecessor’s victory in the 
Convention of Closter-Seven (September 10), by which Cumberland 
undertook to disband his army, and thus surrendered Hanover and 
Brunswick to the French. The Hanoverian ministers were anxious 
to induce George II. to act as he had done in the previous war, and 
to stipulate for the neutrality of his German territories. There was 
now nothing to prevent Richelieu from invading Halberstadt and 
striking at the heart of the Prussian mouarchy. But the duke’s 
incapacity, and the want of discipline in his army, allowed the 
opportunity to slip. 

But this was not the only danger which Frederick had to face. 
The battle of Kolin had hastened the collection of an imperial 
army, which was to carry out the decrees of the Ratisbon diet and 
was placed under the command cf the prince of Hildburghausen. 
A French force under Soubise advanced from Alsace to co-operate 
with the Germans. Numerically the army was formidable, but the 
military organisation of the Empire had for centuries been in- 
efficient, and it was soon proved that the old defects were as 
prominent as ever. There was no unity among troops collected 
from various provinces, most of which had no direct interest at 
stake, and the junction of the French, instead ef being an advantage, 
only increased the confusion. But the situation was sufliciently 
threatening to Frederick. A Russian army under Apraxin entered’ 
Kast Prussia, defeated Marshal Lehwald at Gross-Jiigersdorf 


A.D. 1757. ROSSBACH. 413 


(August 30) and devastated the province with relentless barbarity. 
At the same time Swedish troops were sent to Stralsund, and 
prepared to attempt the recovery of their former possessions in 
Pomerania. 

It was impossible for Frederick to remain inactive while his 
territories were exposed to invasion at four different points. All 
his efforts to force the Austrians to give him battle had proved 
unavailing. Leaving Bevern to oppose Charles of Lorraine and 
Daun as best he might, he himself marched to Thuringia to oppose 
the armies of France and the empire. On the news of his approach, 
Soubise compelled Hildburghausen to retire against his will to 
Kisenach. Frederick’s march was interrupted by the news that 
Hadik, a Hungarian officer, had led a body of light cavalry to 
Berlin, and had even levied a contribution on the capital. But 
the affair proved to be a mere raid, and had no political or military 
importance. The slight retrograde movement of the Prussians was 
to some extent advantageous, as it emboldened the enemy to leave 
the hilly country round Eisenach and to risk an engagement. 
They had received reinforcements from Richelieu under the duke de 
Broglie. At Rossbach (November 5) Frederick with 22,000 men 
utterly routed the allied army, which was more than twice as large 
as his own. The battle was a turning-point in the history of 
Europe. The projected humiliation of Prussia, which so lately 
seemed inevitable, was in a moment rendered almost impossible. 
On every side the tide of victory turned. The Russian general 
Apraxin retired from East Prussia, probably because the Czarina’s 
illness offered the prospect of a change of rulers, and the heir, Peter 
of Holstein, was certain to desert the Austrian alliance. Lehwald 
was now enabled to employ his forces against the Swedes, who were 
speedily driven from all their possessions in Pomerania except 
Stralsund. Still more encouraging to Frederick was the news from 
England. Pitt, who had been driven from office by royal dislike in 
April, was restored three months later by the popular favour. He 
at once undertook the supreme control of the war. ‘The Convention 
of Closter-Seven was disavowed, and Frederick was requested to 
allow prince Ferdinand of Brunswick to take Cumberland’s place 
at the head of the army in Hanover. 

There was still one enemy to be faced before Prussia could be 
regarded as secure. Directly Frederick had marched to Thuringia 
the Austrians gave up their inactivity, forced Bevern to retire, and 
drove him before them into Silesia, where he took up his position 
under the walls of Breslau. While the main army kept watch upon 
his movements, a detachment undertook the siege of Schweidnitz. 
At last it seemed likely that Maria Theresa would recover the 


414 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. XIX. 


province whose loss had been her greatest and most keenly felt 
disaster. Eight days after his victory at Rossbach, Frederick set out 
to recover the ground that had been lost. But the news that 
reached him on his march seemed to prove that he came too late. 
Schweidnitz surrendered, and Charles of Lorraine, spurred to 
activity by reproaches from Vienna, at last attacked and defeated 
Bevern at Breslau, and the Silesian capital fell into his hands, 
Liegnitz, another important fortress, fell, Bevern was taken prisoner, 
and the Austrians seemed secure of winter-quarters in the heart of 
Silesia. But, in spite of their successes, they were guilty of serious 
mistakes. They ought never to have allowed: the junction of 
Bevern’s troops with Frederick, which took place at Parchwitz on the 
28th of November. The victors of Rossbach inspired their defeated 
comrades with their own jubilant confidence. On the 5th of 
December Frederick won the greatest of his victories at Leuthen. 
The rout of the Austrian army was so complete that no one thought 
of further resistance. Breslau and Liegnitz surrendered before the 
end of December, and the whole of Silesia was recovered to Prussia 
with the exception of Schweidnitz. 1t had been a very critical 
year for Frederick the Great. His aggressive campaign had been 
ruined by the defeat of Kolin, and tbe Prussian monarchy had 
been threatened with annihilation. But two great battles had re- 
moved the danger, and restored the contending powers to their 
original position. 

§ 9. It is obvious that the war was as far from an end as ever. 
Various schemes of pacification were proposed, but nothing came of 
them. On the contrary, the two hostile alliances were more closely 
cemented. It was all-important for Frederick to retain the support 
of England, and this was assured by the accession to power: of 
William Pitt. The English interests in the war were purely colonial, 
and English hostility was directed against France, not against 
Austria. But Pitt saw clearly that the only chance of success in 
America and India lay in occupying the energies of France in 
Europe. This he determined to do, not by employing the chief 
forces of England on the continent, because they were required else- 
where, but by subsidising the king of Prussia, and thus enabling 
him to carry on the war after his own resources had been exhausted. 
This determination frustrated the schemes of Maria Theresa, who 
hoped to emphasize the division of interest between England and 
Hanover, and to induce the latter province to assume a neutral 
attitude. This was rendered hopeless by the successes of the 
general whom Frederick had sent to Hanover at. Ditt’s request, 
Ferdinand of Brunswick. . At the heginning- of 1758-the- French 
held a commanding position in northern Germany stretching from 


A.D. 1757-1758. FERDINAND OF BRUNSWICK. 415 


Bremen to Brunswick. This position Ferdinand was determined to 
attack. His task was facilitated by the incompetence of his enemies. 
Richelieu had been recalled to Versailles, but his successor, 
Clermont, was still more incapable and inexperienced. By a series 
of masterly movements the prince of Brunswick, who was backed 
up by the appearance of Henry of Prussia in the territory of 
Hildesheim, forced the French to retreat from one line of defence to 
another, until they finally crossed the Rhine near Emmerich on the 
27th of March. In less than six weeks, Hanover, Westphalia and 
Hesse had been freed from foreign occupation. These events, fol- 
lowing as they did upon Rossbach and Leuthen, excited the greatest 
enthusiasm in Kngland, and removed all danger of opposition to 
Pitt’s policy in parliament. On the 11th of April, 1758, a new 
convention was concluded between England and Prussia, in which 
the terms agreed upon at Westminster were confirmed, England 
promised an annual subsidy of £670,000, and both parties agreed not 
to come to terms with the enemy without mutual consent. 

§ J0. The expulsion of the French from northern Germany con- 
vinced the Austrian Government that the desired humiliation of 
Prussia could not be effected by Austria and Francealone. . This had 
in fact been proved by the events of 1757. The victory of Hasten- 
beck and the Convention of Closter-Seven had brought no propor- 
tionate advantage to the Austrian cause. This conviction led 
naturally to another, that the chief reliance must henceforth be 
placed upon Russia. Already, directly after the battle of Leuthen, 
an urgent request had been made at St. Petersburg not only that 
the Russian attack upon Prussia should be conducted with greater 
energy, but also that a large contingent of Russian troops should be 
sent to join the main Austrian army. Both these demands were 
approved by Elizabeth, who had recovered from her recent illness, 
and whose enmity against Frederick blazed as fiercely as ever. In 
January, Apraxin was superseded by Fermor, who at once advanced 
from Memel, took Kinigsberg, and by the end of February compelled 
the whole of Prussia proper to do homage to the Czarina. - Other 
events raised still more sanguine expectations at Vienna. ‘The great 
obstacle to the efficient interference of Russia in the war had been 
the chancellor, Bestoujef, who was suspected with justice of having 
been bribed with English gold. _ But in the inquiry that was 
instituted into the conduct of Apraxin disclosures were made 
which implicated the chancellor. He was proved to have been 
privy to a plot not only to dethrone the Czarina, but also to exclude 
her heir Peter of Holstein, and to transfer the government to Peter’s 
wife; Catharine, as~regent for her: infant son. This. discovery, 
which alienated from him both the chief parties at court, ruined 


416 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP, xIx. 


Bestoujef. He was arrested, deprived of all his offices, and 
condemned to death, a sentence which Elizabeth commuted to 
perpetual banishment. But his dismissal brought few of the 
expected advantages with it. Woronzow, who succeeded to the 
chief direction of affairs, was more slavis: ly devoted to his mistress’s 
will, but he had little of Bestoujet’s capacity with a large share of 
his dishonesty. The chief result of the change was the conclusion 
of a new treaty between Austria and Russia, almost exactly contem- 
porary with the convention between Prussia and England. 

§ 11. Meanwhile Frederick had made great preparations for the 
coming campaign. His strength lay in the concentration of his forces, 
which made him unable to resist invasion at different points, but on 
the other hand enabled him by rapid marches to inflict successive 
blows upon his enemies. His first act was to lay siege to Schweid- 
nitz, which surrendered on the 16th of April, and thus the recovery 
of Silesia was completed. But Frederick was not content to maintain 
the integrity of his own territories. In spite of the odds against 
him, he determined once more to assume the aggressive, in the hope 
that a conspicuous success would force the court of Vienna to come 
to terms. Accordingly he astounded the Austrians by suddenly 
invading Moravia, and on the 5th of May he commenced the siege 
of Olmiitz. But he met with a more determined resistance than 
he had anticipated. Maria Theresa had at last been induced to 
withdraw her confidence from Charles of Lorraine, and the command 
of the Austrian army wasentrusted to Daun. A bold attack might 
have crushed the Prussian forces, but Daun adhered to the cautious 
tactics in which he excelled. Advancing to the neighbourhood of 
Olmiitz, he threatened Frederick’s communications with Silesia, and 
endeavoured in this way to compel him to raise the siege. But the 
king obstinately persevered in his enterprise, until the destruction of 
an important convoy by Laudon, who founded a great reputation 
in this engagement, rendered it hopeless. On the 1st of July he 
quitted Olmiitz, and marched into Bohemia and thence to Silesia. 
This march, which he conducted in the face of a vastly superior 
forces and without disaster, must be regarded as one of his greatest 
military achievements. But he had failed to carry out the plan he 
had formed, and this failure forced him to accept the English 
subsidies, which he had hitherto hoped to dispense with. 

The Prussian army was not allowed any rest after its arduous 
services. The Russians, having completed the conquest of Prussia, 
had occupied Poland, thus dealing a final blow to French influence 
in that kingdom, and now threatened to invade Brandenburg and to 
march upon Berlin. 'To oppose them there were no troops except 
those which; under Lehwald, had held Pomerania against the Swedes, 


A.D. 1758. ZORNDORF AND HOCHKIRCH. A417 


and which were now commanded by Dohna. Frederick determined 
to march in person against the Russians who were besieging 
Ciistrin. His intimate knowledge of the country served him. in 
good stead, but he found the enemy more formidable than he had 
anticipated. At Zorndorf a great battle was fought on the 25th of 
August. The Russians were badly led, but they fought with dogged 
courage, and it was only the great superiority of the Prussian 
cavalry under Seydlitz that decided the day after ten hours’ hard 
fighting. The Prussians had suffered great losses, but they had 
gained their object. Fermor retreated to Poland and gave up all 
idea of co-operating with the Swedes. Brandenburg was secured 
from invasion on this side. 

No sooner had Frederick overcome one danger than he had to face 
another. Daun had taken advantage of his absence to enter 
Lausitz, and had received orders to crush Prince Henry of Prussia 
and to recover Dresden. He was to be assisted by the army of the 
Empire, of which Hildburghausen had surrendered the command to 
the prince of Zweibriicken. A second Austrian army under Harsch 
had entered Silesia and invested Neisse and Cosel. Daun’s 
invincible sluggishness allowed the favourable moment to escape. 
By a march of marvellous rapidity Frederick was able to join his 
brother before the decisive blow had been struck. A series of 
manceuvres followed, in which Frederick sought to entice Daun from 
his impregnable position at Stolpen. At last after a month’s 
inactivity Daun left Stolpen on the 5th of October, only to occupy 
an equally strong position at Kittlitz. Losing all patience at the 
delay, and anxious to decide matters before the Silesian fortresses 
could be taken, Frederick disregarded the advice of his generals, and 
exposed his troops under the Austrian camp by the village of 
Hochkirch. Daun was not slow to take advantage of the opportu- 
nity given him, and attacked the enemy in the early morning. 
Although taken by surprise, the Prussians fought with desperate 
courage, and it was only after enduring great losses that the 
Austrians could claim the victory. As regards results, the battle 
was more advantageous to Frederick than Daun. The latter thought 
that he had done enough if he excluded the Prussians from Silesia. 
But Frederick, who re-formed his army with great celerity, deter- 
mined on a bold move when he found that Daun declined to follow 
up his success. Marching right round the Austrians, he hurried off 
to Silesia, and forced Harsch to raise the siege of Neisse and 
Cosel. Meanwhile Daun had advanced upon Dresden, which was 
defended with admirable skill by Schwettau. By another forced 
march Frederick re-appeared in Saxony, and Daun, giving up the 
enterprise as hopeless, retired into winter-quarters in Bohemia. 


418 MODERN EUROPE CHAP. xix. 


The Prussian successes were completed by the repulse of the 
Swedish attack on Pomerania. 

§ 12. Frederick could hardly have been so successful in 1758 but 
for the fact that he had nothing to dread from the French. This 
danger was averted by the successes of the allied army under Ferdi- 
nand of Brunswick. After his first achievement in driving the French 
back to the Rhine, Ferdinand had rested for a time to recruit his 
exhausted troops. Meantime great efforts were made by France 
to redeem the recent disasters. The experienced Marshal Belleisle 
was appointed minister of war, and he took great pains to reform the 
military administration. It was determined that Clermont should 
advance at the beginning of July to recover the lost territory. 
But Ferdinand was the first to move. Early in June he crossed 
the Rhine, and on the 26th he defeated the French at Crefeld. It 
seemed probable that the war would be transferred to the old 
battle-ground, the Netherlands. So great was the danger, that 
Maria Theresa released the French government from its engage- 
ment to send Soubise with a second French army into Bohemia. 
Soubise, with Broglie as second in command, now invaded Hesse- 
Cassel. The latter defeated the defending force at Sangershausen, 
and the province was once more occupied by the French. At the 
same time Clermont was superseded by the more capable de 
Contades. Ferdinand found it impossible to continue his advance, 
and in August he re-crossed the Rhine, followed by the French. 
The arrival of reinforcements from England enabled the prince 
to maintain a defensive attitude, and the campaign ended without 
either side gaining further advantages. Ferdinand had rendered 
conspicuous service to Prussia, and had established his reputation 
as a general. 

Meanwhile France had entirely lost that superiority at sea 
which had been obtained at the outbreak of the war. Pitt main- 
tained that his share in the continental struggle was wholly 
subordinate to the naval and colonial interests of England. He 
erganised a series of attacks on the French coast which were very 
expensive in proportion to their results, but which were sufficiently 
galling to a great power, and inflicted considerable damage on the 
French shipping. More important were the losses inflicted upon 
I’rench commerce, and the interruption of the connection between 
France and its colonies. But it was in the colonies themselves 
that the chief English successes were won. In India the founda- 
tions of a new empire were laid by Robert Clive, who took the 
French settlement of Chandernagore, and won a great victory at 
Plassy (July, 1757) over the Nabob Surajah Dowlah. In Madras 
a great effurt was made to revive the French power by Lally 


A.D. 1757-1758. INDIA AND AMERICA. 419 


Tollendal, who was appointed commander-in-chief in 1758. He 
captured Fort St. David, the most important of the English 
fortresses, and razed it to the ground. But his overbearing temper 
alienated his colleagues, and his ignorant disregard of Indian 
customs exasperated the natives. He failed in an attack upon 
Madras, and in 1759 the struggle was finally decided in favour of 
the English by Coote’s victory at Wandewash. 

It was in the American war that the greatest interest was felt 
both by English and French. In 1757 Montcalm with inferior 
forces had successfully defended Canada against General Loudoun, 
But Pitt’s accession to office entirely changed the aspect of affairs. 
Loudoun was replaced by Abercrombie, with whom were sent out 
Amherst, Wolfe, Howe, and other officers chosen for their abilities 
rather than their standing. In June, 1758, the fortress of Louisburg, 
with almost the whole of Cape Breton, was captured, and thus the 
way into Canada was laid open. Abercrombie was repulsed from an 
attack upon ‘Ticonderoga, but this failure was more than made up for 
by the capture of Fort Duquesne (November 25), which received the 
name of Pittsburg. The loss of this fortress cut off the connection 
between the French territories in Canada and on the Mississippi, 
and destroyed the greatest dang2r that had threatened the English 
colonies. : 

§ 13. The results of the year 1758 were summed up by Frederick the 
Great: “Our campaign is ended, and neither side has gained any- 
thing except the loss of many brave soldiers, the ruin of several 
provinces, the plundering and burning of several flourishing towns.” 
A French minister said the same thing in different words: 
“ Whether through ill-luck or through errors, the powers of a great 
league like ours have no advance to show for the last two years. 
This is as humiliating to us as it is honourable to our enemies.” 
The Prussian king had more than held his own. His defeat at Hoch- 
kirch had served only to show off his brilliant qualities as a leader 
and the sterling merit of his troops. Against the occupation of 
East Prussia by the Russians and of Hesse by the French were to 
be set the retention of Saxony by Frederick, the conquest of the 
Westphalian bishoprics by Ferdinand of Brunswick, and the 
colonial successes of the English. Of the allies the greatest suiferer 
was undoubtedly France, which had the least interest at stake, and 
which had in fact been involved in the European war by the mere 
whim of an incompetent king and his mistress. The french 
treasury was empty, and the loss of colonial trade made it especially 
difficult to refill it. It was no wonder that these considerations had 
a depressing effect upon the chief minister, Bernis, who had been.a 
prominent agent in concluding the treaty of Versailles. Through- 


490 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. xIx, 


out the year he had insisted upon the necessity of making peace, 
But Maria Theresa and Kaunitz refused to listen to such a proposal, 
and their obstinacy carried the day with Louis XV. and Madame de 
Pompadour. Conscious that he was incapable of confronting the 
difficulties of the situation and that his vacillation was losing him 
his favour at court, Bernis petitioned that the ministry of foreign 
affairs might be entrusted to Stainville, the French envoy at 
Vienna, who had lately been created duc de Choiseul. The 
request was granted, but Bernis soon discovered that he had 
introduced a rival rather than a colleague. In December he was 
not only removed from office, but banished from Paris, and Choiseul 
became chief minister. The new appointment was as unpopular 
among the French people, who had always hated the war, as it was 
welcomed at Vienna. Choiseul was a native of Lorraine, his father 
was in the service of the grand duke of Tuscany, and his accession 
to office was regarded as a proof that the close alliance between 
France and Austria was to remain intact. But these expectations 
were not exactly fulfilled. Choiseul was too able and ambitious to 
follow slavishly the policy of Bernis or the wishes of Madame de 
Pompadour. While he was still envoy at Vienna, he had not 
disguised his conviction that the terms of the treaty of Versailles 
were far too favourable to Austria, and his first act as minister was 
to insist on its being revised. Kaunitz was naturally anxious 
to retain the old provisions, but he was compelled to authorise 
Stahremberg to open fresh negotiations. The result was the 
conclusion of two new treaties, one public and the other secret, 
which were dated the 30th and 3lst December, 1758, but were not 
really signed until March, 1759. By them the former secret treaty 
was altogether abrogated, and thus France freed itself from the 
obligation not to make peace until Silesia and Glatz had been 
recovered. At the same time France engaged to do all in its 
power to assist in the recovery of these provinces, and to continue 
the payment of subsidies to Austria and its allies. Nothing was 
said of any further partition of Prussia in favour of Saxony or 
Sweden. Neither party was to conclude a separate peace with- 
out the other. The scheme of dividing the Netherlands was 
abandoned. At the same time the family alliance between the’ 
Hapsburgs and Bourbons was strengthened by an agreement that 
the archduke Joseph should marry a princess of Parma, and that the 
second archduke, who was destined to succeed his father in Tuscany, 
should marry a Neapolitan princess. The new terms were more 
equitable than those of 1757, but the advantage was still decidedly 
on the side of Austria. France was bound to continue its exhaust- 
ing efforts in a continental war which ruined its colonial power and 


A.D. 1758-1759. CONDITION OF PRUSSIA. 421 


the object of which was to make acquisitions for Austria. It was 
impossible even to come to terms with England without the 
consent of the empress-queen. It was no wonder that the Austrian 
alliance was cordially detested by the French, and that the continu- 
ance of the war weakened the hold of the monarchy on its subjects. 

§ 14. Successful as Frederick had been, the prospect of affairs in 
1759 was by no means encouraging. His territories were so com- 
paratively small that victory was far more exhausting to him than 
defeat was to his enemies. He contrived to raise his army to its 
old numbers, but the new recruits were by no means equal to the 
veterans he had lost. The military superiority of the Prussian 
troops was a thing of the past; his own genius and the ability of 
the officers he had trained were the only advantages left. And he 
was in serious straits for want of money. His father’s hoards had 
long been consumed, the English subsidies and the ordinary taxes 
were insufficient to defray his enormous expenses. ‘Io raise supplies 
he had to resort to the debasement of the coinage, and other 
measures which could only be excused by extreme necessity. In 
1759 he realised for the first time that it was impossible for him 
to act on the offensive. He must wait for his enemies, and then do 
all in his power to resist invasion. But he allowed himself one 
blow against the enemy. Prince Henry made a successful inroad 
into Bohemia, destroyed the Austrian magazines, and then turning 
into Franconia, he drove the army of the empire back to Bamberg 
and Wiirzburg, whence he was recalled to the defence of Saxony. 
Daun had collected a large army with which he hoped to reduce 
Silesia and, if possible, to recover Saxony, but he refused to move 
until the Russians had advanced to the Oder, and for two months 
Frederick remained inactive on the Silesian frontier. 

Elizabeth of Russia had transferred the command of her army 
from Fermor to the inexperienced Soltykoff, who delayed the 
opening of the campaign till the summer. At last he marched 
from the Vistula through the unfortunate Poland, and at -Ziillichau 
he crushed a detachment of Prussian troops under Wedell. The 
Russians now laid siege to Frankfort-on-the-Oder, and Frederick saw 
that he must march against them in person unless he wished to 
give up Brandenburg and Berlin to the enemy. Before he could 
arrive, the Russians had been reinforced by 20,000 Austrians under 
Laudon, so that theirnumbers were now 80,000 to Frederick’s 50,00. 
In spite of his inferior forces the king did not hesitate to attack 
their strong position at Kunersdorf (August 12th, 1759). At first 
the headlong valour of the Prussians carried all before them, and 
the battle might have been won, if Frederick had only desisted from 
further hostilities. But he was determined to annihilate the 


499, MODERN EUROPE. CuHap. XIx, 


enemy, and forced his exhausted troops to attack the last intrench- 
ments. The attack was repulsed, and a well-judged charge of the 
Austrian cavalry under Laudon turned the defeat into an utter rout. 
Frederick, who had recklessly exposed his life on the field, was with 
difficulty induced to fly. For a short time he fell into complete 
despair and even meditated suicide. But he was saved by the 
action of the enemy. The Russians might have advanced into the 
heart of Brandenburg, but they thought that they had done enough 
for their allies, and determined to leave the completion of their work 
to Daun. Frederick soon found himself once more at the head of a 
considerable force, and the return of the Russians to the Vistula. re- 
moved the most immediate danger that threatened him. The only 
direct result of the battle of Kunersdorf was the loss of great part of 
Saxony. There were no troops to defend the province, and the 
imperialists had no difficulty in compelling Leipzig, Torgau, and 
even Dresden to capitulate. The Prussians hastened to repair these 
losses, but they were unable to take Dresden, which Daun under- 
took to defend. '’o harass the Austrians, Frederick sent 12,000 men 
under Finck to cut off their communications with Bohemia. The 
expedition was as unlucky as it was ill-judged. Daun surrounded 
Finck’s troops with vastly superior numbers, and forced him to 
capitulate at Maxen (November 21st). ‘This was a final blow to 
Frederick, whom the events of 1759 had brought to the verge of 
ruin. 

§15. It was fortunate for Frederick that the war was more successful 
in the west of Germany than in the east. Choiseul had conceived the 
bold scheme of recovering the French colonies by invading England 
itself and by conquering Hanover. The latter project was foiled by 
ferdinand of Brunswick. The French had two armies in the field, 
one under Contades, and the other under the duke de Broglie, 
who had succeeded Soubise. Ferdinand determined to anticipate 
attack, and marched into Hesse against Broglie. But at Bergen 
(April 13th) he was defeated and compelled to retire into Westphalia. 
The two French armies were now united, and their combined 
strength carried all before it. Minden was taken, and Ferdinand 
saw that the only way of saving Hanover was to fight a battle. By 
masterly manceuvres he enticed the enemy into the open country, 
and won a complete victory on the Ist of August. The French only 
escaped annihilation through the extraordinary refusal of Lord 
George Sackville to lead the cavalry into action. For this conduct 
he was subsequently tried by court-martial and dismissed from the 
service. The battle of Minden secured to the allies the possession of 
Westphalia, and further operations drove the French from Hesse. 

Still more conspicuous was the failure of Choiseul’s other grand 


A.D. 1759-1760. ENGLISH VICTORIES. 423 


scheme, the direct invasion of England. Never did the English 
vindicate their claim to naval supremacy more convincingly than in 
1579. The Toulon fleet was destroyed by Boscawen in the battle 
of Lagos (August 17), and three months later Hawke gained a still 
more complete victory over the Brest fleet off Quiberon (No- 
vember 20). But the greatest English success was the capture of 
Quebec, an enterprise which cost the life of the two rival com- 
manders, Welfe and Montcalm. With the latter perished the last 
hope of maintaining Canada for France. ‘These disasters forced 
upon Choiseul the conviction that peace was an absolute necessity. 
It had been a great disadvantage to France that no help was to be 
obtained from Ferdinand VI. of Spain. But in August, 1759, 
Ferdinand died, and the crown passed to Charles of Naples, who was 
married to a daughter of Augustus of Saxony, and who had never 
forgotten the way in which England had treated him during the 
Austrian succession. He was also under an obligation to Maria 
Theresa, who had enabled him to leave Naples and Sicily to his 
younger son, whereas by previous treaties they ought to have 
passed to his brother Philip of Parma. These were substantial 
grounds for expecting that he would give cordial support to France. 
But, on the other hand, Charles III. was vividly impressed with 
the traditional hostility of the Bourbons to the Hapsburgs, and he 
resented the new French policy of alliance with Austria. It was 
unadvisable for a new king to excite the hostility of England, and 
Charles contented himself at first with offering his services as a 
mediator. Choiseul was anxious to conclude a separate treaty with 
England which should detach that power from the continental war. 
But Pitt, in his loyalty to his ally, rejected the proposal with 
decision. Prussia and England, however, proved their desire for 
_ peace by issuing a joint declaration at Ryswick (October, 1759) in 
which they suggested the summons of a European congress to settle 
all dispute. But the suggestion was taken as a proof of weakness, 
and Russia and Austria refused to listen to it. Maria Theresa had 
to pay a heavy price for the faithfulness of her northern ally. The 
Czarina demanded some compensation for her exertions in the war, 
and Austria was compelled with great unwillingness to sign the 
Schuwalow treaty (March 21, 1760), by which Russia was to retain 
permanent possession of Prussia proper and Danzig. ‘This 
arrangement was in the highest degree irritating to France, which 
had always posed as the opponent of Russian influence in northern 
Europe, and it threatened ruin to the smaller powers on the Baltic, 
Sweden and Denmark. 

§ 16. 1760 was the last great year of the war, the last in which 
pitched battles were fought and strenuous exertions made by the 


424 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. xIx. 


various powers. The main armies of Prussia and Austria had 
wintered side by side in Saxony. As usual, Daun was inert and 
sluggish, and the campaign was opened in Silesia by his more active 
colleague Laudon. Laudon was opposed by one of Frederick’s 
favourite generals, Fouqué, who left his position at Landshut on 
the approach of the Austrians. Frederick ordered him to hold the 
position at all hazards, and Fouqué obeyed with the blind obedience 
that was required of Prussian generals. The result was a disaster 
hardly inferior to that of Maxen. Fouqué’s troops refused to 
surrender, and fought with the courage of despair against three 
times their number (June 23). In the end they were annihilated, 
Fouqué was captured, and Laudon was enabled to take the fortress 
of Glatz. But Breslau, which he next attacked, made a resolute 
and successful resistance. Silesia now became the chief scene of 
hostilities. A large Russian force crossed the Oder and entered the 
province. Frederick himself hurried up from Saxony, and Daun 
followed hard upon him. A junction of the three hostile armies 
must have resulted in the loss of Silesia. But Frederick was saved 
by Daun’s inactivity, which enabled him to fall upon Laudon and 
to defeat him at Liegnitz (August 15) before assistance arrived. 
‘The victory averted the danger for the moment. The king could 
march to Breslau, the Russians retired without effecting anything, 
and a junction was impossible. But Frederick’s position was not 
encouraging. A large force of Russians and Swedes were besieging 
Kolberg, the key of Pomerania, and an Austrian and Russian 
detachment had entered Brandenburg, marched upon Berlin, and for 
the second time levied contributions upon Frederick’s capital. And 
the campaign in Silesia had left Saxony undefended. This was 
taken advantage of by the imperial troops, who took the strong 
fortress of Torgau and almost drove the Prussians from the whole 
electorate. These dangers forced the king to quit Silesia, and again 
Daun, whose Fabian tactics were wholly unsuited to existing cir- 
cumstances, marched after him. But on the news of Frederick’s 
approach the enemy evacuated Berlin, and at the same time the 
garrison of Kolberg succeeded in repulsing the _ besiegers. 
Frederick now turned fiercely upon Daun, who occupied an almost 
impregnable position near Torgau, and here the last pitched battle of 
the war was fought (November 3). The Prussians stormed the 
entrenchments with devoted courage, but the tremendous cannonade 
of the Austrians forced them to retreat each time. Daun had even 
sent tidings of his@victory to Vienna, when Ziethen with the 
reserves joined Frederick, and a last assault was ordered. After a 
contest in which each side suffered terribly, the Austrian position 
was carried, and Daun retreated upon Dresden, where he went into 


of 


A.D. 1760. DEATH OF GEORGE II. 425. 


winter-quarters. The campaign had been exhaustive to all the 
combatants, but it had made no essential differences in their 
relative positions. Frederick had not been driven out of Silesia or 
of Saxony, but neither had the Austrians. 

§ 17. In western Germany the events of 1760 were equally inde- 
cisive. ‘lhe French under Broglie, the ablest of their rather inferior 
commanders, recovered their hold on the unfortunate province of 
Hesse-Cassel ; but all attempts to reduce Westphalia and Hanover. 
were repulsed by the superior strategy of Ferdinand of Brunswick, 
who gained a small success at Warburg (July 31). The exertions 
of the French were absolutely resultless, except so far as they 
exhausted the resources of the government and made it more 
anxious to conclude a peace. Inthe colonies Eng’and continued its 
uninterrupted successes, and the surrender of Montreal (September 8, 
1760) and of Pondichéry (January 26, 1761) finally established 
English rule in Canada and in India. But the most important 
event in English history was the death of George II. (October 25, 
1760) and the accession of his grandson, George III. ‘The new king, 
who had been brought up under the influence of his mother and of 
her favourite Lord Bute, was anxious before everything to over- 
throw the Whig domination, and as a first step to get rid of the 
present ministry of Pitt and Newcastle. To effect this it was 
absolutely necessary to end the war, as the nation would not entrust 
its conduct to any one but Pitt. Noimmediate change was made in 
foreign policy, but from this time influences were at work which had 
a distinct influence on the continental war. 


1V. ConcLuUsION OF THE WaR. 


§ 18. The winter was spent in discussing a proposal to hold a con- 
gress at Augsburg, but nothing came of it, and the war had to be re- 
sumed. All the powers were exhausted by the efforts they had made. 
Even Austria found it necessary to diminish its military establish- 
ment. The general exhaustion is evident in the conduct of the 
various campaigns, which cease to have any notable importance. In 
Silesia Frederick held his ownagainst an Austrian army under Laudon 
and the Russians under Buturlin. The two commanders found it 
impossible to agree, and the Prussians reaped the benefit of their dis- 
union. But in October Laudon succeeded in taking Schweidnitz, and 
this success enabled the enemy to take up their winter-quarters in 
Silesia. In Saxony Prince Henry commanded for his brother, and 
contrived to hold his own without fighting a battle against Daun, 
whose caution seemed to increase as the war made on. In the west 
a great effort was made by the French, and Broglie, was reinforced 

20 


426 - MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. xIx. 


by a second army under Soubise. The joint numbers were now 
nearly 150,000, but they made little progress. Ferdinand of 
Brunswick defeated them at Bellinghausen and foiled all Broglie’s 
attempts to advance beyond Hesse. In the north the siege of 
Kolberg was recommenced by the Russians, who took the fortress in 
December after an obstinate defence, and thus established their hold 
upon eastern Pomerania. But they failed to reduce Stettin, and the 
advance of the Swedes was checked by the Prussians under Belling. 
In June, 1761, the English captured Dominique in the West Indies, 
and Belleisle on the coast of France. 

§ 19. Throughout the year negotiations had been carried on be- 
tween England and France. But Pitt’s demands were very exorbitant, 
and it was evident that he aimed at the complete annihilation of 
the French naval power. Choiseul now redoubled his endeavours 
to drag Spain into the war. Charles III.’s indignation against 
England had been constantly increasing, and in June the French 
envoy demanded on behalf of Spain the restoration of some prizes 
taken by the English, the acknowledgment of Spanish rights to 
the fishing in Newfoundland, and the withdrawal of IMnglish 
settlements from Honduras. These demands were rejected by Pitt, 
and in August a new Family Compact was arranged between the 
two Bourbon powers. It was agreed that Spain should declare war 


against England if peace were not arranged by May, and France. 
and Spain guaranteed to each other their respective possessions. . 


The existence of this treaty was suspected in England, and Pitt 
proposed to anticipate hostilities by declaring war against Spain, 
and by sending expeditions to Havannah and Martinique. But the 
enemies of the minister seized this opportunity to effect his 
downfall. The proposal was rejected by the council, and on the 
5th of October Pitt resigned. Newcastle remained nominally 
prime minister, but Bute became the real head of the government. 
Circumstances, however, forced the minister to follow Pitt’s policy. 
In January, 1762, war was formally declared with Spain, which had 
already prepared an expedition into Portugal. The successes of 
the English arms were as brilliant as ever. Martinique was taken 
in February, and in August Havannah was captured. English 
auxiliaries helped to expel the Spaniards from Portuguese territory. 
In Germany Ferdinand of Brunswick took the aggressive against 
the French, who were commanded by d’Estrées and Soubise, drove 
them out of Hesse to the Rhine, and recovered Cassel. 

§ 20. In spite of these successes Bute clung obstinately to his 
desire for a peace, without which his ministry was insecure. He 
declined to continue the Prussian subsidies, and left Frederick face 
to face with the European coalition. This desertion inspired 


a 


A.D. 1761—1763. PEACE OF PARIS. 427 


Frederick with a permanent distrust of England and its parliamen- 
tary constitution. He was only saved from destruction by a stroke 
of extraordinary good fortune. On the 5th of January, 1762, 
Elizabeth of Russia died, and Peter of Holstein became czar as 
Peter Ill. He had always been a devoted admirer of Frederick the 
Great, and he signalised his accession by breaking with Austria and 
withdrawing his troops from Silesia. Not content with this, he 
proposed a defensive and offensive alliance with Prussia, which was 
concluded on the 5th of May. Without Russian support the 
Swedes were powerless, and they also made peace at Hamburg 
(May 22). For a moment the prospect was opened to Frederick 
of revenging himself upon his enemies. Leaving his brother to 
continue the war in Saxony, he marched into Silesia to attempt 
the recovery of Schweidnitz. The Russian troops under Czernit- 
scheff, which had so lately opposed him, now returned to his 
assistance. But these favouring circumstances were not of long 
duration. In less than six months Peter succeeded in alienating 
every class and every interest in Russia. His wife, Catharine, who 
had long aspired to rule, seized the opportunity of effecting a 
revolution at St. Petersburg. On the 9th of July Veter was 
deposed, imprisoned, and soon afterwards murdered. Catharine 
ascended the throne, and naturally abandoned her husband’s policy. 
The Russian troops were recalled, and Frederick was left once more 
to his own resources. But Catharine resulutely refused to renew 
the alliance with Austria, and accepted the peace which Peter had 
arranged with Prussia. Frederick was more than a match for 
Austria alone In October he forced Schweidnitz to surrender, and 
thus recovered some of the lost ground in Silesia. At the same 
time Prince Henry defeated the imperial army at Freiburg, and 
Prussian troops made another raid against the German states which 
had helped Maria Theresa, took Bamberg and Nuremberg, and 
terrified the diet at Ratisbon into making a formal declaration of 
neutrality. A truce was arranged both for Silesia and Saxony, and 
this practically terminated open hostilities. 

§ 21. Meanwhile the negotiations between England, France and 
Spain had been hurried on and brought toa conclusion in November 
in the preliminaries of Fontainebleau, which were converted into 
the final Peace of Paris on the 10th of February, 1763. The terms 
were extremely favourable to England, but not so favourable as the 
events of the war would have justified or as might have been 
obtained if Pitt had been still in office. For instance, Manilla and 
the Philippine Islands, which were captured before the preliminaries 
were signed, were surrendered without any compensation whatever. 
The islands which were restored to France and Spain were more 


428 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. xIx. 


valuable than those which were retained. Some of Bute’s 
colleagues remonstrated against the way in which lawful advantages 
were thrown away in the determination to effect a peace. But, 
with all deductions, the treaty was a triumph for England and 
marks a great era in the history of her maritime and colonial 
power, France restored Minorca, the first and greatest of her 
conquests, and surrendered the whole of Canada, Nova Scotia, and 
Cape Breton. The Mississippi was fixed as the boundary of English 
territory in the west, and Spain purchased the restoration of 
Havannah by ceding Florida. The Spanish claim to share in the 
Newfoundland fisheries was withdrawn, but France retained its 
rights. England kept Senegal, Grenada, St. Vincent, Dominique 
and Tobago, but restored to France Belleisle, Goree, Guadaloupe, 
Martinique and St. Lucia. In India, all conquests made since 1749 
were restored, but the French possessions were to be merely 
commercial factories, and they were forbidden to erect fortifications 
or to maintain troops. Dunkirk, an old bone of contention, was 
to be placed in the condition required by the treaty of Aix-la- 
Chapelle. 

The treaty of Paris terminated the war in western Germany, as 
the allied army was broken up by the withdrawal of the English 
contingent, and the French agreed to evacuate all their conquests. 
Prussia and Austria were now left face to face, and it was obvious 
that peace could not be long delayed. Maria Theresa could expect 
-nothing but loss from the continuance of the war under existing 
conditions, and she was forced to abandon the scheme of reducing 
Prussia to powerlessness. Augustus of Saxony was eager for a 
peace which should restore to him the electorate from which he 
had been excluded for six years. The diplomatists met at his 
castle of Hubertsburg, where the treaty was signed on the 15th of 
February, 1763. Maria Theresa had demanded at first that she 
should retain Glatz, and that some compensation should be given to 
Saxony. But Frederick was determined not to sacrifice an inch of 
territory, and his iron will prevailed. The suggestion that the 
fortifications of Glatz should be dismantled he also rejected. 
Ultimately the treaty restored matters exactly to their position 
before the war. Maria Theresa resigned all territorial claims, and 
practically renewed the previous treaties of Berlin and Dresden. 
By a secret article Frederick pledged himself to give his vote for the 
election of the archduke Joseph as King of the Romans. To 
Augustus III. Frederick promised to evacuate Saxony, and the 
demand for compensation was dropped. 

From a purely European point of view the great result of the 
war was the elevation of Prussia to an equality with Austria, and 


A. D.1763. RESULTS OF THR’ WAR. 429 


the consequent establishment of a dual leadership in Germany. 
This was entirely due to the marvellous endurance and military 
genius displayed by Frederick, who had held his own against the 
three great powers of Europe and emerged from the struggle without ° 
loss, and with a well-merited reputation. But regarding the war as 
an episode in the world’s history, its great significance lies in the 
decision of the quarrel between England and France for the New 
World in the east and west. The definite establishment of the 
English power in India and the exclusive assumption of North 
America by the Anglo-Saxon race, are events of the most far- 
reaching and stupendous importance. At the same time the English 
conquest of Canada prepared the way for another great event, the 
revolt of the American colonies. By removing all dangers from the 
French it destroyed the one great motive for dependence upon 
England, while the expenses incurred in the war necessitated those 
schemes of taxation which proved the ultimate occasion of the revolt. 
There is one other result of the war which ought not to be over- 
looked, the humiliation of France, which for a time loses its place 
among the great powers, and the alienation of the French people 
from the monarchy. The Austrian alliance was the work of 
Louis XV. and Madame de Pompadour, and it is significant of the 
change of popular sentiment that this in itself was enough to make 
the war hateful to the nation. 


430 MODERN EUROPE. 


CHAPTER XX 
EUROPE AFTER THE PEACE OF HUBERTSBURG. 


1. SOUTHERN EUROPE AND THE FALL OF THE JEsuITS.—§ 1. Influence 
of Literature in the 18th century. § 2. Choiseul’s ministry in 
France; Madame du Barry; fall of Choiseul; the Parlement Maupeou ; 
death of Louis XV. § 3. Spain under Charles III.; Pombal’s ministry 
in Portugal; expulsion of the Jesuits. § 4. Expulsion of the Jesuits 
from France and Spain; attitude of the papacy; suppression of the 
Order by Clement XIV.; subsequent history of Spain and Portugal. 
Il. EAsTeERN EUROPE AND THE First PARTITION OF POLAND.—§ 5. 
Austria after the war; accession of Joseph II. to the empire. § 6. 
Frederick’s administration in Prussia. § 7. Policy of Catharine II. 
§ 8. Constitution of Poland ; question of the succession; interests of 
the European states. § 9. Death of Augustus III.; election of 
Stanislaus Poniatowski. § 10. Russian supremacy ia Poland; proposal 
of religious toleration ; Confederation of Radom; reforms. § 11. 

_ Indignation of the Poles; Confederation of Bar; Russia at war with 
Turkey ; policy of Frederick; Russian successes against the Turks. 
§ 12, Interviews between Frederick and Joseph II.; Prussian proposals 
at St. Petersburg; the treaty of partition; treaty of Kutschuk 
Kainardji. UI. THe BavartAn Succession.—§ 13. Aggressive 
policy of Joseph II. § 14. Extinction of the Bavarian line; claims of 
Joseph II.; opposition of Prussia; treaty of Teschen. IV. Josepu II. 
AND THE LEAGUE OF PRINCES.—§ 15. Administration of Maria 
Theresa ; accession of Joseph II.; his domestic reforms; his policy in 
Germany; discontent of the princes. § 16. Attitude of Prussia; 
alliance between Austria and Russia; Catharine’s aggressions in 
Turkey. § 17. Project to exchange the Netherlands for Bavaria; the 
Fiirstenbund; death of frederick Il. V. Tat EASTERN QUESTION, 
1786-1792.—§ 18. Character of Frederick William II. of Prussia ; 
intervention in Holland; treaties of the Hague. § 19. Relations of 
Joseph IJ. and Catharine II.; renewal ef Russo-Turkish war; 
Hertzberg’s policy. § 20. The eastern war; Sweden attacks Russia ; 
treaty of Werela. § 21. Prussia at the head of a great coalition; 
question of war with Austria; death of Joseph II.; skilful administra- 
tion of Leopold II.; treaty of Reichenbach; treaties of Sistowa and 
Jassy. V1. THE SECOND AND THIRD PARTITIONS OF POLAND.—-§ 22. 
Alliance of Poland and Prussia; reform of the Polish constitution ; 
attitude of the neighbouring states; the Confederation of Targowicz ; 
death of Leopold II.; the new constitution abolished. 23. Catha- 
rine II. negotiates the Second Partition with Prussia; indignation of 
Austria; diet of Grodno. § 24, Revolt of Kosciusko; failure of 
Prussian intervention; Russia puts down the revolt; the Third 
Partition; finis Polonix. 


INFLUENCE OF LITERATURE. 431 


J. SoutHeRN Europe AND THE FALL OF THE JESUITS. 


§ 1. A pERtIop of comparative peace followed the treaties of Paris 
and Hubertsburg, and at the same time the history of Europe loses 
the unity that has characterised it since the formation of the great 
league against Louis XIV. England abdicates the commanding 
position which it had assumed under Pitt, and its energies are 
absorbed in domestic questions, such as the Wilkes quarrel, or in 
attempting to suppress the rising liberties of the American colonies. 
On the continent the great powers divide themselves into two great 
leagues ; in the south the Bourbon states held together by the Family 
Compact, in the north and east, Russia, Prussia and Austria. In the 
north, the all-absorbing question is the succession to the Polish 
crown, which we must consider subsequently. In the south, 
historical interest centres rather in the men of letters than in 
political events. In the fifteenth century, literature had for the first 
time become a living force, had broken through the trammels of 
medieval ideas, and had given birth to the Reformation. The idea 
of individual liberty then established had never been developed to 
its logical extent. With the Catholic reaction and the splitting up 
of the Protestants into rival sects a period of stagnation had set in. 
In most of the countries of Europe absolute governments had been 
set up, and literature had become subservient and therefore degraded. 
In France there had been one conspicuous movement of opposition, 
that of Jansenism. But the Jansenists were only partially pro- 
gressive, and their opinions never emancipated themselves from the 
bonds of sect and class. One country alone, England, had main- 
tained the struggle for liberty, and had thus preserved the indepen- 
dence of literature. With the English philosophers, especially 
Hobbes and Locke, originated most of the ideas which spread to 
France in the eighteenth century and there became productive of 
vast political results.. It is impossible here to treat of the great 
philosophic movement which connects itself with the names of 
Voltaire, Montesquieu, and Rousseau. Voltaire was the great 
distinctive teacher of the new school. In almost every form of 
literature he excelled his contemporaries, and in all his numerous 
writings he brought the keen edge of his satire to bear upon the 
ordinary conceptions of religion, politics, and society. The lesson 
for which posterity owes him gratitude is one which he vindicated 
in practice as well as in theory, that philanthropy ought to be. one 
of the aims of government, that the welfare of the subjects is higher 
than even the interests of a ruling family or the privileges of a class. 
Montesquieu, in his Lettres Persanes, struck a vein of satire as 
effective though more genial than Voltaire’s, and in his Esprit des 


432 MODERN EUROPE. Cap. xx. 


Lois he introduced the historical method of enquiry which was 
destined to prove the most powerful solvent of traditional errors. 
But the most influential teacher of the century was Rousseau, who 
inspired men with a passion for the old free life of nature, and who 
developed as the basis of a new social organisation the theory of 
Hobbes, that royal authority originated in a contract between king 
and people. The new spirit inspired by these writers found ready 
acceptance in the literary coteries that were so prominent a feature 
of Parisian society. In every department of learning their influence 
was visible. Buffon begins a new era in natural science. Condillac 
and Helvetius develop the philosophy of mind and morals. Diderot, 
d’Alembert and the Encyclopzdists apply the new doctrines to every 
subject. Of special practical importance are the advances made in 
political economy. The mercantile system, which had so long 
regulated the relations of Europe, received a fatal blow from the 
teaching of Quesnai, Turgot, and Adam Smith. Nor was the new 
spirit confined to men of letters. Frederick of Prussia, Catharine of 
Russia, and Joseph II., with a number of smaller sovereigns and 
statesmen, prided themselves on being the leaders of a new 
movement. The attempt to force enlightenment upon their 
subjects by a paternal government was naturally not altogether 
successful, but it produced indirect results which were not without 
influence upon the subsequent course of history. Evenin the states 
of southern Europe, where the Catholic reaction had fully worked 
itself out, the new ideas found at any rate temporary admission. 
Their most conspicuous achievement was the destruction of the 
order of the Jesuits, the aggressive champions of Catholicism. In 
the last century the Jesuits had had to face a bitter and resolute 
attack from the Jansenists, and though they had emerged successfully 
from the contest, their credit and influence had been seriously 
impaired. The renewal of the onslaught in the eighteenth century 
was not solely due to the progress of enlightenment. The Jesuits 
had mixed themselves up in commerce, had employed their influence 
to obtain privileges and monopolies, and had thus become possessed 
of enormous wealth. They had utilised their position as missionaries 
to acquire political power in the colonies, and in some cases, as in 
Paraguay, they had formed a state in complete practical indepen- 
dence of the home government. These commercial and colonial 
establishments brought-them into collision with the secular power 
even in countries where the desire for reform was altogether non- 
existent. 

§ 2. The most important of the southern states were France and 
Spain, both ruled by Bourbon princes. France remained after the 
conclusion of the peace under the domination of Madame de 


A.D. 1763+1770. MINISTRY OF. CHOISEUL. 433 


Pompadour and Choiseul, and when the king’s mistress died in 
1764, the minister’s position was unshaken. Choiseul’s great ambi- 
tion was to revive the naval power of France, so as to recover 
what had been lost to England during the war. Domestic affairs he 
was willing to subordinate to foreign politics. But his designs were 
never destined to be realised. As a minister he compares very 
favourably with his immediate predecessors and successors, and 
personally he was honourable and patriotic, but he did very little 
for France. At home he was worried by the question of: the 
Jesuits, and the incessant quarrels with the Parliament of Paris 
which fill up the history of France during the century. The 
Parliament set itself in opposition to the unlimited exercise of the 
royal power in taxation and in the administration of justice, and 
especially against the practice of arbitrary imprisonment by means 
of lettres de cachet. But unfortunately its opposition was dictated 
by the interests, not of the people, but of the privileged classes, and 
its success or failure was a matter of little moment to the bulk of 
the people. Choiseul tried .to compromise matters by making 
slight concessions, but the reconciliation was purely temporary. 
Abroad, France made two acquisitions of territory during his 
ministry. Lorraine fell in to the crown on the death of Stanislaus 
Leczinski in 1766, and in 1768 Genoa, unable to put down the 
revolt of Pascal Paoli, sold Corsica to the French, who took posses- 
sion in the next year, after crushing the rebels with relentless 
severity. Soon afterwards Choiseul was deprived of office, and his 
fall marks a new degradation in the history of France. Louis XV. 
lost his wife, Marie Leczinska, in 1768, and after a brief period of 
remorse fell into worse debauchery than ever. His new mistress, 
Madame du Barry, was a degraded woman belonging to the lower 
classes, but she obtained complete ascendency over the brutalised 
king. Even the most submissive of French courtiers shuddered 
with horror at this novel infamy, and Choiseul’s pride refused to 
bend before the new favourite. On the 24th of December, 1770, he 
received a curt letter from the king dismissing him from all his 
offices, and ordering his immediate retirement to his estates. 

He was succeeded by a triumvirate, consisting of Maupeou, the 
chancellor, the Abbé Terrai, minister of finance, and d’Aiguillon, 
who had charge of foreign affairs. Maupeou, the guiding genius of 
the government, neglected foreign affairs in order to put down 
discontent at home. His measures were characterised by brutality 
and resolution. As the Parliament of Paris continued its opposition 
to the royal will, it was abolished, and the provincial parliaments 
shared the same fate. A council of seventy-five nominees of the 
crown was appointed for Paris, and received the nickname of the 

20* 


434 - MODERN EUROPE. Cinke. =x: 


Parlement Maupeou. To supervise the administration of justice in 
the provinces six consei/s supérieurs were created for the chief local 
centres. It is significant to notice that the liberal party hesitated 
whether to deplore or welcome the change. Voltaire and some of 
his associates approved the action of Maupeou. The Parliament 
had been a close privileged institution, and its members held office 
by the payment of a recognised bribe. The new judicial system, 
if less independent, was more prompt in action and less expensive. 
On the other hand, the mass of the people felt, and felt rightly, 
that it was better to have some restraint upon the royal power even if 
that restraint was often exercised from selfish motives. Louis XV. 
had entirely lost the popularity that had once given him the 
name of the Bien-aimé. His death was now as eagerly desired as 
his life had been in 1744. His son, a gloomy reactionary, had died 
in 1765, leaving three sons, all of whom subsequently came to the 
throne as Louis XVI., Louis XVIII., and Charles X. On the 10th 
of May, 1774, Louis XV.’s death gave the crown to his eldest grand- 
son, and relieved France of one of the most worthless kings the 
world has seen. ‘‘ He had lived 64 years, and reigned 59; he had 
passed his life in destroying little by little the prestige which the 
two great Bourbon kings, Henry IX. and Louis XIV., had given 
to modern royalty, a prestige already much weakened in ethb old age 
of Louis the Grand.” 

§ 3. The throne of Spain had been occupied since 1759 by 
Charles III., who had learned to rule in his ‘previous kingdom of 
Naples, and who carried with him the affection and respect of his 
former subjects. Charles was by no means a partisan of the new philo- 
sophical ideas; he was a devoted adherent of the church, but at the 
same time he had an exaggerated idea of the royal power and a firm 
determination to maintain.and advance it. In Naples, with the help 
of his minister T'anucci, he had restricted the exercise of the papal 
supremacy, forced the clergy to contribute to the taxes, and struck 
a blow at the feudal system which had so long flourished in the 
kingdom. When the death of his half-brother, Ferdinand VI., 
gave him the Spanish crown, he left Naples to his third son, 
ferdinand IV., and entrusted the government during the minority 
to Tanucci, who carried it on on the oid lines. In Spain, Charles III. 
continued the same policy of putting an end to those exclusive 
privileges and pretensions, whether of the church or the nobles, 
which stood in the way of royal absolutism. It was this which 
brought him into collision with the Jesuits, whom he would other- 
wise have been unwilling to attack. 

But the first blow against the order had already been strtielbs in a 
state which they had learnt to regard as their special property. 


A.D. 1750-1758. POMBAL. ‘ 435 


Under John Y. (1706-1750) Portugal had fallen into complete 
insignificance. ‘The wealth produced by its commerce passed 
mostly into the hands of the English. The government was carried 
on by ecclesiastics, the people were slaves to the grossest supersti- 
tions. John’s successor, Joseph I. (1750-1777), was not a:whit 
more enlightened than his father. On the contrary, he was absorbed 
in vicious pleasures, and left the cares of government altogether to 
a minister who would have obtained a great reputation in history if 
he had belonged to one of the more important states. This was 
Sebastian Joseph de Carvalho, better known by his latcr title of the 
Marquis de Pombal. He obtained such complete ascendency over 
the feeble character of the king that he became absolute despot at 
Lisbon. He employed his power to introduce the most thorough 
reforms into every department of government, and he enforced them 
by means that stand in complete contrast to the liberal. spirit: in 
which they were conceived. ‘The great obstacle in his way was the 
opposition offered by the privileged classes, the nobles and clergy, 
and especially by the Jesuits, who had -become all-powerful under 
the late king. The first opportunity for attacking the order arose 
from events in South America. By a treaty in 1750 Spain and 
Portugal agreed to exchange their respective colonies of Paraguay 
and San Sacramento. The Jesuits, who had made themselves 
absolute masters of Paraguay, were bitterly hostile to the transfer, 
and induced the Indians to oppose it with arms. The result was a 
war which lasted several years, and it was not till 1756 that the 
resistance of the natives was crushed. The expense which this 
entailed upon the Portuguese government naturally excited enmity 
against the order which was responsible for the war. At the same 
time the Jesuits encouraged the popular discontent roused by the 
domestic reforms of Pombal. The minister resolved on their des- 
truction. In 1757 the Jesuits were forbidden to approach the court 
without leave, and in the next year they were prohibited from 
trading, preaching, and the confessional. Both parties appealed to 
the pope, but Benedict XIV. died before he had arrived at any 
decision. His successor, Clement XIII., was a devoted adherent of 
the Jesuits, and Pombal would hardly have succeeded as he did if 
terror had not given him the unconditional support of the supersti- 
tious Joseph I. In September, 1758, as the king was returning 
from a visit to the wife of the Marquis of Tavora, he was fired upon 
and wounded. For three months an enquiry was conducted 
apparently without success. Suddenly all members of the two 
great families of 'lavora and Aveiro were seized, and in their papers 
evidence was supposed to be found of a conspiracy against the king 
and minister. The Jesuits were implicated in the conspiracy, and 


436 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP, xx. 


when the nobles were put to death application was made to the 
pope to permit the trial and punishment of the priests. As 
Clement XIII. hesitated to give the desired permission, Pombal 
took the decisive step of seizing all the Jesuits and transporting 
them by sea to Civita Vecchia, where they were left to be main- 
tained at the pope’s expense (Sept. 1759). The property of the 
society was confiscated, and this act was followed by a complete 
breach between Portugal and Rome. Those Jesuits who had been 
imprisoned for complicity in the plot were tried, and Father 
Malagrida, a fanatical enthusiast, was executed in 1761. Pombal 
employed the Inquisition in the interests of the crown, and was thus 
led to prolong the existence of an institution which otherwise he 
would probably have suppressed. 

§ 4. Meanwhile the example of Portugal had been followed by other 
countries. A great scandal was caused by the bankruptcy of La 
Valette, the head of a great Jesuit establishment at Martinique, 
who had involved himself in considerable mercantile undertakings, 
The credit of the society was immensely shaken by this affair, and 
Venice and Genoa at once took steps to restrict their privileges. 
In France the Parliament of Paris undertook to revise the consti- 
tutions of the order, and in 1761 issued edicts condemning them as 
inconsistent with the laws of the realm. ‘The provincial parlia- 
ments took the same line, and were supported by the influence of 
Choiseul and Madame de Pompadour. Clement XIII. tried in vain 
to stay the storm, and the efforts of the orthodox party headed by 
the dauphin were equally fruitless. In 1764 a royal edict was 
issued which abolished the Jesuits in France. 

Clement XIII. answered this edict by issuing the bull Apos- 
tolicum pascendi munus, which renewed the confirmation of the order 
and denied the truth of the recent charges. The only result of the 
bull was to intensify the opposition of the secular governments, 
which were now reinforced by the support of Spain. In 1766 a 
tax imposed by the finance minister Squillace provoked a rising in 
Madrid, and Charles III. was compelled to satisfy the populace by 
dismissing the unpopular foreigner. This was a serious affront to a 
king, who held a high conception of his prerogative, and when the 
subsequent enquiry pointed to the Jesuits as the authors of tke 
revolt, Charles’s devotion to the church was overcome by the desire 
for revenge. In April, 1767, an edict was issued which banished all 
Jesuits from the kingdom, and measures were at once taken to carry 
this into effect. The unfortunate fathers were crowded into ships 
and carried to Civita Vecchia. The pope refused to receive them, 
and it was not until two months of hardship had elapsed that 
Choiseul allowed them to land in Corsica. The Bourbon states in 


A.D. 1759-1777. SUPPRESSION OF THE JESUITS. 4387 


Italy followed the example of Spain, and the Jesuits were expelled 
from the Two Sicilies and from Parma. 

Pombal now proposed that the various states should combine to 
force the hand of the pope, and a rash act of Clement XIII. gave 
additional weight to his representations. The weakest of the hostile 
powers was Parma, which, since the death of Don Philip in 1765, 
was governed by a French nobleman, du Tillot, as regent for the 
infant duke Ferdinand. The pope, as claiming to be feudal 
superior of Parma, excommunicated the duke and declared his 
principality confiscated. The insult to the house of Bourbon was 
promptly avenged. France seized Avignon and the Venaissin, 
while the Neapolitans invaded Beneventum. In January, 1769, the 
ambassadors of Spain, Naples and I'rance demanded the suppression 
of the order. Before he could give an answer, death removed the 
pope from the difficulties that had gathered so thickly round him. 
Great efforts were made by both parties to influence the new 
election, and the Jesuits nearly succeeded in carrying their candidate. 
Ultimately the choice of the cardinals fell upon Lorenzo Ganganelli, 
a moderate man who had declared for neither side. ‘The new pope, 
who took the name of Clement XIV., hesitated for some years 
about his decision. On the one side was the persistence of the 
secular powers, on the other the undisguised threats of the vengeance 
which the Jesuits would take. Ultimately the pope had to give 
way when Maria Theresa, orthodox as she was, declined to support 
the order, and Bavaria, the stronghold of Catholicism, expelled 
its members. In July, 1773, Clement XIV. issued a brief, sup- 
pressing the Jesuits, to the intense delight of the progressive 
party throughout Europe. But Clement’s fears proved to be 
well-founded. In the next year he was suddenly seized by ea 
fatal illness, and the symptoms left little doubt that he perished 
of poison. The fall of the Jesuits was not final. The reaction 
against the excesses of the Revolution gave them before long a new 
lease of existence. 

Pombal continued his reforming activity in Portugal until the 
death of Joseph I. in 1777, when the crown passed to his eldest 
daughter Maria, who had married her uncle Don Pedro. The 
minister who had rendered such services to his country was 
dismissed, and persecuted by hostile accusations till his death in 
1782. The new government adopted a reactionary policy, and Por- 
tugal relapsed into its former lethargy. In Spain the reforms of 
Charles III. were more moderate and therefore more lasting. Two 
ministers belonging to the liberal party, Campananes and Florida 
Blanca, governed the state during his long reign, and after his death 
in 1788 the latter retained his power for four more years. 'The 


438 MODERN EUROPE. OHAP. xx, 


outbreak of revolutionary violence in Paris was fatal to the 
cause of reform in other countries. 


TI. Eastern Evurore AND THE First PARTITION oF POLAND. 


§ 5. The policy of Maria Theresa and Kaunitz was unaltered by the 
disasters of the Seven Years’ War. They continued to uphold the 
alliance with France as the only secure means of counterbalancing 
Prussia. But Austria had suffered one very severe loss in the 
defection of Russia. All attempts failed to induce Catharine II. to 
adopt the same attitude as Elizabeth had done. ‘This compelled 
Austria to desist from its projects of aggression and revenge, and to 
direct its efforts to avoid the outbreak of a new war. Jn 1764 the 
archduke Joseph was unanimously elected King of the Romans, all 
difficulties having been removed by the withdrawal of Prussian 
opposition. In the next year the emperor Francis I. died suddenly. 
He had been kept in the background by the superior qualities of his 
wife, and had distinguished himself only in reforming the Austrian 
finances, a task for which his business capacities and tastes admi- 
rably fitted him. Joseph now became emperor, and was appointed 
by his mother joint-ruler of the Austrian states. His younger 
brother Leopold succeeded to the grand duchy of Tuscany. From 
this time the administration at Vienna loses much of its unity. 
Maria Theresa, as she grew older, became more orthodox and con- 
servative, and’ more disinclined to commit herself to an energetic 
foreign policy. Joseph, on the other hand, was an ardent champion 
of the new ideas, eager for religious toleration and domestic 
reforms, and ambitious to increase the power that had fallen to 
him. 

§ 6. In Prussia the great problem which Frederick had to solve 
after the peace of Hubertsburg was to repair the ruin that the war 
had brought upon his kingdom. He grappled with the difficulty 
with characteristic energy, and the centralised administration which 
he had established gave him great advantages in carrying out the 
work. Fortunately he had avoided running into debt, and had even 
collected money for a new campaign should it be necessary. Re- 
gardless of the lessons of the new political economy, he employed 
his capital in subsidising industry of all kinds, and he took stringent 
measures to restrict both the exportation of raw produce and the 
importation of manufactured goods, so as to make his country self- 
supporting. His policy was wonderfully successful within certain 
limits, and Prussia owed to him the revival if not the creation of its 
industrial prosperity. But he could never have done this if he had 
not been careful to maintain the peace of which the country stood 


AD. 1763. CATHARINE II. 439 


in such earnest need. ‘To insure peace it was necessary to keep his 
army ona footing that would inspire respect, and to raise supplies 
for this purpose he incurred great unpopularity by imposing an 
excise and by introducing French officials to organize and collect 
the tax. But he also needed allies. J'rance and Austria were sus- 
picious and their friendship was not to be relied upon. England 
was distrusted by Frederick ever since Bute had succeeded in ousting 
the ministry of Pitt, and moreover England had withdrawn to a 
great extent from continental politics. It was therefore a great 
relief to the king when Russia proffered her support. He eagerly 
accepted the overtures made to him, and was willing to risk con- 
siderable sacrifices to maintain an alliance on which the security of 
Prussia and the duration of peace equally depended. 

§ 7. In spite of the ease with which the revolution of 1762 had 
been accomplished, Catharine II. was far from feeling secure upon 
the Russian throne. She was anxious to carry out those reforms, 
religious and political, which had roused such a storm against her 
husband. The result was wide-spread disaffection, and the foreign 
envoys reported that the new government was not likely to last long. 
But Catharine had gained over the soldiers, and she took prompt 
measures to check a rising. The unfortunate Iwan VI. had been 
imprisoned ever since 1740. Advantage was taken of a conspiracy 
for his release to put him to death, and thus a pretender whose 
birth made him formidable was removed. But Catharine was fully 
conscious that her position, as a foreigner, could never be really safe 
until she could identify herself with the hopes and aspirations of 
the national party. For this end she reverted to the ambitious 
schemes of Peter the Great and endeavoured to distract the atten- 
tion of her subjects by a vigorous policy of aggrandisement. 
Russia had suffered less than the other combatants in the war, and 
was now the most powerful state of northern Europe. It was 
Catharine’s task to make this power felt and recognised, and she 
perceived that this could best be accomplished by an alliance with 
Prussia. France was the old opponent of Russian influence in the 
north, and though this duty had been recently neglected, there was 
no doubt that it would be resumed now that the connection with 
Russia had been severed. ‘To counterbalance the alliance that 
existed between the Bourbon states and Austria, which had been 
cemented by several intermarriages, Catharine was anxious to 
form a great coalition of the north between Russia, Prussia and 
England. 

§ 8. The pivot on which the relations of the eastern states turned at 
this period was the fortunes of Poland. The time had long passed 
since Poland had been an object of terror to its German neighbours. 


440 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. xx. 


Its decline was due in the first place to internal anarchy. The govern- 
ment was nominally a monarchy, but really a republic, in which the 
nobles had a monopoly of power. There was no middle class to 
act as a link between the nobles and the crowd of oppressed and 
powerless serfs. The constitution, such as it was, rested upon a 
triple basis; the elective character of the monarchy, which enabled 
the nobles to make their own terms with the king of their choice; 
the liberum veto, by which:a single noble could frustrate the 
decisions of the diet; and the right of confederation, which au- 
thorised any number of nobles to’: combine to effect an object, if 
necessary, with arms. ‘The disorder to which such institutions 
naturally gave rise were complicated by religious differences. In 
the latter part of the 16th century Poland had become the northern 
centre of the Catholic reaction, and from that time orthodoxy had 
been maintained by rigid persecution. In 1733 a decree was passed 
which declared all non-Catholics incapable of holding any office or 
even of sitting in the diet. The “dissidents,” as they were called, 
consisted of two chief classes, the Protestants in the western 
districts, and the adherents of the Greek Church in the east near 
the borders of Russia. Both had been treated with equal injustice 
by the dominant sect, and their complaints had given frequent 
excuses for intervention on the part of foreign powers. For two 
generations Poland had been ruled by members of the Saxon house, 
Augustus II. and Ill. If another member could obtain the 
succession, the crown might possibly be rendered hereditary. But 
in Poland itself there was a strong feeling against perpetuating the 
Saxon connection, and it was also certain that too many foreign 
interests were involved for the matter to be regulated as a purely 
domestic question for the Poles. 

Perhaps the interest most directly involved in the fate of Poland 
was that of Prussia. Frederick, though he had few religious convic- 
tions, had found it advantageous to follow the example of his father, 
and to pose as the champion of Protestantism. He was therefore 
the natural ally ofa large number of the Polish dissidents, and was in 
fact bound by treaty to support them. Again, Saxony was the 
rival of Prussia in northern Germany, and the two states had recently 
been engaged in a bitter quarrel. It was a natural wish of Frederick’s 
to prevent his neighbours from obtaining hereditary possession of 
the Polish crown. But he had still more vital interests at stake. 
Prussia, the territory from which his kingdom took its name, the 
modern Kast-Prussia, had been a Polish fief; and though it had 
been freed from dependence by the Great Elector, it was cut off 
from Brandenburg by the considerable province of Polish-Prussia on 
the western side of the Vistula. The result of this separation was 


A.D. 1733-1763. POLAND. 441 


clearly manifest in the recent war, when it had been utterly 
impossible to defend East Prussia against the Russians, and but for 
Elizabeth’s death the province might have been annexed to the 
empire of the Czars. It was urgently necessary for Prussia to 
obtain possession of the intervening territory, and Frederick was 
from the first eager to arrange a partition of Poland by which he 
could make the acquisition without exciting alarm and jealousy. 
But, as matters stood, he could not take the initiative, and was 
compelled to fall in with the designs of Russia until the opportu- 
nity presented itself for effecting his own aims. 

Russia was almost as directly interested, and was more determined 
to execute its intentions. In the Seven Years’ War, Poland, in 
spite of its nominal neutrality, had served as a convenient base of 
military operations for the Russians. On the conclusion of the 
peace the troops were withdrawn, but Catharine determined to 
retain her hold on a province which had been so useful. This 
could no longer be done directly, but it could be made quite as 
effective by indirect means. Catharine, like Frederick, wished 
to exclude the Saxon house from the throne. Saxony was the 
ally of Austria and France, the two powers which were jealous 
of the progress of Russia. Moreover Catharine had already 
quarrelled with Saxony about Courland, where she had replaced the 
exiled Biren, after expelling Prince Charles, one of the sons of 
Augustus III., who had been established by Elizabeth in 1759. 
Her plan was to place a native piast on the throne, who should be 
bound to her by gratitude and by the need of support, and through 
whom she could practically govern Poland. If possible, she would 
have preferred to annex the kingdom altogether. Parts of Poland, 
White Russia, Black Russia and Little Russia, had once belonged 
to the territory of St. Vladimir, and the national party at St. 
Petersburg, which the Czarina was anxious to conciliate, was very 
eager for their recovery. But Catharine was averse to a partition, 
and an annexation was impossible without forcing on a new 
European war, so she was content to pursue the more moderate 
plan, and to wait for favourable circumstances to develop it. 

France had at one time had a strong party in Poland. A French 
prince had once occupied the throne, and several had aspired to the 
same place. Quite recently Louis XV. had entertained schemes for 
obtaining the crown for the Prince of Conti. But these plans and 
the French party had been overthrown by the change of policy 
effected by Madame de Pompadour and Bernis. Alliance with 
Austria had compelled France to give up opposing the designs of 
Russia, and virtually to hand the kingdom over to the rival influence. 
The marriage of the dauphin to a daughter of Augustus IIT. had 


442 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. Xx. 


brought France into close connection with the house of Saxony, and 
it was now proposed to back up the efforts of that house to retain 
its hold upon Poland. Thus France placed itself in a wholly false 
and illogical position. Severing itself from its old friends, the party 
of reform, who wished to strengthen the monarchy and to abolish 
the liberum veto, it allied itself with the adherents of Saxony, the 
party of anarchy, who wished to perpetuate the old abuses and who 
arrogated to themselves the name of “ patriots.” And this line of 
policy, when once taken up, was not pursued with the energy 
needed to ensure success. Choiseul was too absorbed in the dream 
of regaining naval supremacy from England to pay proper atten- 
tion to affairs in Poland, and when he was at last aware of his error 
it was too late to remedy it. 

Austria acted in concert with France in support of the Saxon 
claims, and its conduct is open to the same criticism. But Maria 
Theresa and Kaunitz were resolved not to sacrifice anything for 
their candidate. The first object of their policy was to avoid a war, 
the second to prevent a partition of Poland. As long as these 
were realised they were fairly satisfied to let Catharine have her 
own way about the election, The bold and decisive attitude 
assumed by Russia contrasts strongly with the vacillation of Austria 
and France. 

§ 9. In the midst of all the various schemes and intrigues Augus- 
tus III. died on the 5th of October, 1763. Catharine was already 
prepared with her candidate, Stanislaus Poniatowski, one of her 
former lovers and a nephew of the Czartoriskis, the leaders of the 
anti-Saxon party among the native Poles. In opposition to them 
was a strong party opposed to the establishment of Russian 
influence, and headed by Branitzki and Radziwill. They were 
inclined to put forward the new elector of Saxony, Frederick 
Christian, and he would have had the support of Austria and France. 
But in December, 1763, he followed his father to the grave, and the 
electorate passed to his son, Frederick Augustus, who was only 
thirteen years old, and whose election in Poland was impossible, 
There were two other sons of Augustus III., Xavier and Charles. 
but neither had a great following in the country. Branitzki him- 
self was put forward as a candidate, and his position as commander 
of the army gave him considerable advantages. But the party had 
ceased to be unanimous, and had now a very slight prospect of 
success. Some of the Poles offered to support Prince Henry of 
Prussia, but Frederick promptly refused to allow him to come 
orward. Meanwhile Russian troops had entered Poland to assist 
the Czartoriskis. Austria and France were provoked by this into 
issuing a declaration of their intention to maintain the freedom of 


A.D. 1763—1766. STANISLAUS PONIATOWSKI. 443 


election (March, 1764). This was answered in the next month by 
the conclusion of a formal treaty between Catharine and Frederick. 
Ostensibly only a defensive alliance for eight years, it contained 
secret articles by which the two sovereigns agreed to protect. the 
dissidents, to maintain the Polish constitution intact, and to bring 
about the election of a native past. ‘This practically settled the 
question. France was too far off to interfere otherwise than by 
diplomacy, and Austria was convinced that the sending of troops 
into Poland would force Prussia to take a similar step and rekindle 
the war. The Czartoriskis were anxious to introduce reforms, and 
especially to abolish the right of veto, but they were prevented 
by Catharine. The election was decided by the presence of the 
Russians, and on the 7th of September, 1764, Stanislaus Poniatowski 
was unanimously chosen by a diet from which the vast majority of 
electors absented themselves. 

§ 10. The election was a great triumph for Russia. The character 
of the new king, who was full of good intentions but weak and 
vacillating, seemed to ensure his remaining a submissive tool. 
Repnin, the Russian ambassador, acted as if he was the real ruler of 
the country, and he retained the troops in order to enforce his will. 
Catharine was determined to carry one great measure, the enfran- 
chisement of the dissidents from all the disqualifications that had 
been imposed upon them. But the task proved even more difficult 
than had been anticipated. The mass of the Poles were fanatically 
Catholic, while Stanislaus and the Czartoriskis were eager to intro- 
duce constitutional rather than religious reforms. Now that the 
subservience of Poland seemed assured, Catharine was less un- 
willing to strengthen the kingdom by putting an end to anarchy 
than she had been before. But here the interests of Prussia were 
wholly opposed, and Frederick maintained that though Stanislaus’ 
intentions might be good, yet under his successors a reformed 
Poland might be a dangerous neighbour. Ultimately Repnin 
declared that the dissidents must be made eligible to all offices, to 
the diet and the senate, but that no restriction should be imposed 
on the liberum veto. Stanislaus was obliged to comply against his 
will, and in the diet of 1766 he brought forward the question of the 
dissidents. The Russian proposais were so extreme as to provoke a 
storm of disapprobation. It might have been possible to obtain 
toleration for the proscribed religionists, but to expect the Catholics 
to admit their hated opponents to a share in the making and 
administration of the laws was absurd. Frederick had already seen 
this, and had vainly urged the Czarina to moderate her demands. . 
The diet was carried away by hostility to foreign intervention; and 
instead of granting concessions it decided that all the old laws against 


444 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. xx. 


the dissidents should be maintained intact.. The diet was at once 
dissolved (Nov. 30, 1766). 

Catharine was not in the least shaken in her determination’ by 
this untoward decision, but she perceived that other means must be 
found to carry it out. The Czartoriskis had proved themselves 
insufficient allies, therefore the reform must be effected without, . 
and if necessary against, them. By its attitude in the question of 
constitutional changes Russia had practically espoused the cause 
of the ‘“ patriots,” who wished to retain things as they were. By 
granting their wishes in this respect it might be possible to induce 
them to support the wishes of Russia. Repnin set to work to 
organise confederations of the dissidents in 1767. They were joined 
by a large number of the patriot party, who were led to expect that 
the Czartoriskis would be expelled from office and that probably 
Stanislaus would be deposed. In June the smaller unions were 
combined into one general confederation at Radom under the 
leadership of Radziwill, who had been induced to come over to the 
Russian cause. The presence of Russian troops compelled the con- 
federation to accept an “ instrument,” by which they undertook to 
obtain complete religious equality for the dissidents, and requested 
Russia to guarantee the laws that should be made in the 
approaching diet. No pains were spared by Repnin to influence 
the elections by bribes and intimidation, and the diet met in 
October. But the assembly was not inclined to accept the 
instrument of Radom unconditionally. It was now manifest that 
the Czarina did not intend to depose Stanislaus, and the patriots 
felt that they had been deceived. But opposition was overawed by 
Repnin, who promptly imprisoned the bishops and the leading mal- 
contents, ‘The diet gave way, appointed a delegation to draw up 
the proposed reforms, and prorogued itself till it could receive the 
report. When it met again in February, 1768, it was only to confirm 
the statutes which the delegation had prepared in the interval 
under Repnin’s dictation. The dissidents were to be placed on an 
equal footing with the Catholics as regards all political rights, inter- 
marriages were permitted, and all ecclesiastical disputes were to be 
decided by courts in which Catholics and dissidents were to be 
equally represented. At the same time new secular laws were 
drawn up for the constitution of Poland. In all matters of state 
the necessity of unanimity was retained, except in financial questions, 
when a majority could decide. Some few reforms were introduced : 
the right of a lord to put his serf to death was abolished, and 
tribunals were established to adjudicate between the two classes. 
The diet declared these laws to be perpetual and unalterable; no 
change could be made even by a unanimous vote in the future, 


A.D. 1766-1769. POLAND. 445 


On the 24th of February the diet, and with it the confederation of 
Radom, was dissolved. 

Russia had for the moment carried matters with the strong hand, 
but the latter measures had been disapproved by Frederick. Now 
that Catharine had established her control over Poland it was her 
interest to introduce such changes in the state as should make 
it stronger and more useful to herself. But Frederick had always 
maintained that Prussia could only be secure while Poland was 
weak. If this was true when the kingdom was subject to Saxony, 
it was still more so now that it had fallen under Russian domi- 
nation. His treaty with Catharine was only for eight years, and 
when they had elapsed it was quite possible that Russia might 
employ its ascendency in Poland to attack Prussia. 

§ 11. The hopes which the Russians had based upon the decision of 
the diet proved fallacious. The wildest discontent prevailed in Poland. 
The Prussian envoy at Warsaw sent the following report to Berlin: 
“The guarantee of the constitution irritates the Poles even more 
than the toleration of the dissidents. They fear that they have 
become a province of Russia. ‘They would submit toa foreign rule ; 
but Russia talks always of their rights and liberties, and then 
tyrannises over them; this is intolerable to them.” In southern 
Poland the reaction was strongest, and there an enormous number 
of nobles formed the confederation of Bar, and swore to uphold their 
religion and their independence. ‘he Russian troops which had 
begun to leave the country were recalled to put down the opposition, 
which they did with equal severity and success. But the Poles 
were not wholly dependent upon their own exertions. ‘The rapid 
strides made by the Russian power had at last opened the eyes of 
France to the real significance of events in Poland, and Choiseul 
was now eager to repair the losses for which his negligence was 
partially responsible. Not content with encouraging the rebels in 
every way, he combined with Austria to urge the Turks into war 
with Russia. In July the Russian troops had pursued the confede- 
rates into Turkish territory and destroyed the town of Balta. This 
occurrence forced the Porte into war, and thus brought about the 
very result which Frederick had striven to avoid. Hitherto he had 
watched the course of events with interest but without anxiety, now 
he strained every nerve to prevent the quarrel becoming a general 
one. Choiseul made overtures in Berlin with the object of detaching 
Prussia from the Russian alliance, but Frederick listened to them 
with something approaching to scorn. But at the same time the 
Austrian government, at French instigation, made advances to 
Prussia ; and it was arranged that an interview should take place 
in 1769 between Frederick and the emperor Joseph. This held out 


446 MODERN EUROPE. - Onar. xx. 


considerable advantages to the Prussian king. His great desire was 
to separate Austria from France, and so form a substantial alliance 
between Austria, Russia, and Prussia. This could only be effected 
by bribing the court of Vienna, and now for the first time the idea 
of a partition presented itself to him as a feasible plan. In January, 
1769, he communicated to Solms, his ambassador at St. Petersburg, 
the outlines of a scheme that had been suggested by Count Lynar, 
the negotiator of the convention of Closter-Seven. Anstria was to 
help Russia against the Turks, and to receive as a reward Lemberg 
and the territory of Zips. Frederick himself was to have Polish 
Prussia and the protectorate of Danzig ; and Itussia, as compensation 
for its military expenses, was to take the adjacent part of Poland. 
The project, which Frederick himself described as “ chimerical,” 
was coldly received by the Russian minister, Panin, and was allowed 
to drop. 

By this time the Turkish war had broken out. The Sultan, 
Mustafa III., was opposed to intervention in Poland; but his 
hand was forced by a rising in Constantinople, and he declared war 
against Russia in October, 1768. Hostilities were not commenced 
till the next year, and they never assumed considerable proportions, 
The ‘Turkish army was in the last stage of inefficiency, and the 
Russians, who were wholly unprepared for war, were little better 
Galitzin, an incompetent commander, defeated the grand vizier, and 
took Khoczim after his first attack had been repulsed. His successor, 
Romanzow, “‘the Russian Turenne,” acted with greater energy. He 
drove the Turks from Moldavia, and in 1770 he occupied Wallachia, 
won a great victory over vastly superior numbers at Kaghul, and 
advanced into the Crimea. At the same time a Russian fleet 
appeared in the Mediterranean with the avowed intention of 
restoring Greece to independence. But the admiral, Alexis Orloff, 
mismanaged the expedition. After encouraging the Greeks to rebel, 
he left them to the horrors of a Turkish revenge, and sailed towards 
Constantinople. A victory over the Turkish fleet gave him posses- 
sion of Chios and other islands of the Archipelago, but he refused, 
in spite of his English officers, to attempt the passage of thie 
Dardanelles. So far from being able to assist the Poles, the Turks were 
reduced to the greatest straits, and were compelled to think seriously 
of peace.. In Poland the Russians had easily crushed the confede- 
rates of Bar and re-established their hold on the kingdom. Wher- 
ever their authority failed to reach, the greatest anarchy prevailed, 
and Austria took advantage of this to take possession of the terri- 
tory of Zips, to which it could advance ancient but not very valid 
claims. This act was resented at St. Petersburg, and was pro- 
ductive of not unimportant results. 


A.D. 1769-1770. PROPOSAL OF PARTITION. 447 


§ 12. Meanwhile Joseph had paid Frederick the proposed visit in 
October, 1769, at Neisse in Silesia. The place was well suited for an 
interview which was intended on the part of Austria to express its 
final renunciation of the province for which so much blood had 
been shed. Both king and emperor were favourably impressed with 
each other, but the meeting had no great political results. It was 
an indirect advantage to Frederick, inasmuch as it raised the value of 
his alliance in the eyes of Russia, and the renewed treaty which 
was arranged before the end of the year contained stipulations more 
favourable to Prussia than had been secured in 1764. In the 
autumn of 1770, Frederick paid his return visit to the emperor at 
Neustadt, and at this interview, which was politically much more 
important than the former one, Kaunitz was present. The great 
subjects of discussion were the affairs of Poland and the Turkish war. 
No definite agreement was come to, but Kaunitz undertook to state 
clearly. the views and intentions of Austria. The successes of the 
Russian arms had excited well-founded alarm in Vienna. It would 
be intolerable if the Russians were allowed to establish themselves 
in Moldavia and Wallachia on the verv frontiers of Austria. 
Kaunitz declared that any attempt to do this would force Austria 
into war, which he and Frederick wished to avoid. This was the 
point at which Austrian and Prussian interests converged. Both 
powers were eager to arrange a peace, and it was hailed as a 
fortunate coincidence that during the interview letters arrived in 
which the Porte solicited the mediation of Austria and Prussia. 
Frederick undertook to communicate the views of Austria to 
St. Petersburg, and to support them by his own influence. This 
important negotiation was entrusted to Prince Henry of Prussia, 
who arrived in St. Petersburg in October, 1770. It was this embassy 
that originated the scheme of partition as the best practical method 
of solving the difficulties. Catharine, referring to the Austrian occu- 
pation of Zips, remarked that everybody seemed able to take what 
they liked in Poland. From this time the arrangement of a parti- 
tion became the chief object of diplomacy. It was necessary, in 
order to secure peace, that Russia shouid resign its Turkish conquests. 
For this moderation it could only be compensated at the expense 
of Poland. Prussia, as we have seen, had obvious motives for 
desiring the acquisition of Polish Prussia, which could be taken as 
repayment of the subsidies paid to Russia. Austria could best be 
satisfied with a share of the booty. 

The practical advantages of a partition are obvious, and from 
what has gone before it is e vious that no one can be 
specially accused of having suggested it. The scheme was in the 
air, and had been so for a long time. John Casimir had prophesied 


gh pon 7 
ate 


448 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. Xx. 


- this fate for Poland more than a century ago. Frederick, ever since 


his accession, had looked forward to it as a dream which he could 
hardly hope to realise. Even France, which afterwards made the 
loudest outcry about the injustice of the transaction, was not with- 
out responsibility. Choiseul had definitely offered to Frederick 
Courland and Ermeland as the price of his desertion of the Russian 
alliance. It is none the less true because it has become a common- 
place that Poland deserved no better fate. Its anarchical constitu- 
tion could not be regarded as a domestic matter, because it invited 
and practically compelled the intervention of its neighbours. It 
had become a firebrand in the midst of Europe, and the other powers 
were justified in taking measures to suppress it. 

These considerations may be regarded as justifying the partition 
itself, but hardly the means which were adopted in carrying it out. 
For nearly two years the negotiations went on, and finally resolved 
themselves into a scramble for the largest share of the booty. The 
chief burden of the diplomacy fell upon Frederick, who had the 
greatest interest in arranging a permanent peace. Matters were 
facilitated somewhat by the downfall of Choiseul, whose continuance 
in office might have altered the course of events. His successor 
left the eastern powers to settle the matter among themselves. 
Catharine was stirred to new enmity against Poland by an attempt 
of the confederates in 1771 to seize the person of Stanislaus. The 
createst difficulties were raised by Austria, Maria Theresa was 
opposed to the partition, but her wishes were overruled by Kaunitz 
and Joseph. Their demands, however, were so excessive, that a 
long time was spent in inducing them to moderate them. 
Ultimately a treaty was signed at St. Petersburg in August, 1772, 
between the three powers, which virtually settled the matter. Russia 
obtained Polish Livonia and part of Lithuania, a territory containing 
2500 square miles and about a million and a half of inhabitants. 
To Austria were assigned the county of Zips and the province o 
Red Russia, about 1300 square miles, with a population of two and 
a half millions. Prussia renounced Danzig, but took the coveted 
district of West Prussia, which gave complete control of the Vistula, 


_ and the population of which amounted to about 900,000. It only 


remained to secure the approval of the Polish diet, and this was 
effected by a combination of bribes and intimidation. ‘T'he diet met 
in 1773, was converted into a confederation to avoid the veto, and 
finally sanctioned the treaty in September. The three powers had 
already sent troops to occupy the shares assigned to each respectively. 
Stanislaus remained king of the rest of Poland; but he could only 
rule in complete dependence upon Russia, and his power was a 
mere shadow compared to that of the Russian envoy at Warsaw. 


A.D. 1771-1774. KUTSCHUK KAINARDJL 449 


Meanwhile the Turkish war had not been ended. <A truce had 
been arranged in May, 1772, and a congress had assembled to settle 
the terms of peace. But the Russian demands were too excessive 
for the Porte to accept, and the Turks resumed hostilities in 1773. 
They attempted to recover Moldavia and Wallachia, and for a time 
they succeeded in forcing the Russians to retreat. Mustafa III. 
died in December, and was succeeded by his brother Abdul Hamid. 
In the next year Romanzow won a complete victory, and compelled 
the grand vizier to accept the terms dictated to him at Kutschuk 
Kainardji. The Russians restored the conquered provinces except 
Azof and Kinburn, only stipulating for toleration for the Christian 
population. The Tartars of the Crimea and Kuban were declared 
independent of the Porte, and authorised to elect their own Khan. 
Russian ships were allowed free passage through the Dardanelles, 
and the right of sailing in the Turkish seas and on the Danube. 
Poland, for which the Turks had undertaken the war, was not even 
mentioned in the treaty. 


Ill. Tue BAVARIAN SUCCESSION. 


§13. Joseph II., the second emperor of the house of Lorraine, was 
the most ardent and daring exponent of the reforming ideas that 
spread through Europe in the eighteenth century. No regard for 
tradition or prejudices could stay him, no task was too difficult for 
his ambition. For some time his powers were limited. His mother, 
Maria Theresa, kept a firm hold of the Austrian government, and 
her opinions and objects were the very reverse of her son’s. The 
only field of action left open to him was the Empire, and he at 
once undertook the hopeless task of reforming its obsolete institu- 
tions. Measures were taken to purify the Aulic Council from the 
bribery and partiality which prevailed in it, and a commission was 
appointed to examine into the working of the Imperial Chamber. 
But these well-intentioned efforts proved utter failures, and Joseph 
was not the man to carry out a determination in spite of all ob- 
stacles. He resolved to leave the empire to its fate, and set him- 
self to gain as much influence as he could over the states that were 
destined to fall to him. From the management of home affairs he 
was jealously excluded by Maria Theresa, but he succeeded in 
making his influence felt in foreign politics. His great object was 
the territorial aggrandisement of Austria, and his first achievement 
was the arrangement of the partition of Poland. 

The value of the Austrian acquisition in this affair was small 
compared with that of the other contracting powers. Prussia 
obtained a territory which was urgently needed to weld together its 

21 


450 MODERN EUROPE. CHap. xx. 


disjointed-provinces, and Russia advanced her frontiers considerably 
towards the west. This was the all-important result. of the 
partition. The most powerful Slav state in the world—a state 
whose gigantic resources were still undeveloped—was now placed 
in immediate connection with the German powers which had so 
long striven to repress and crush the Slavs. The fate of Europe 
depended upon the attitude which Germany would assume in 
face of this new danger. Frederick the Great comprehended the real 
nature of the crisis, but his isolation had compeiled him to assist 
rather than oppose the progress of Russia. This state of things 
could only be altered by the termination of the long and_ bitter 
enmity between Austria and Prussia and their union against a 
common enemy. Such a result might have been anticipated from 
the two interviews between Frederick and Joseph, but it was not to 
be. Joseph was a professed admirer of the Prussian king, but his 
admiration took the form of a desire to imitate him. If Prussia, a 
small state of recent origin, had been able to gain such signal 
successes, why should not Austria do the same? His profession 
that the loss of Silesia had been forgotten was untrue. He had no 
stronger wish than to recover the province or some compensation for 
it. Doth he and Kaunitz left Neustadt with feelings of distrust and 
enmity against their visitor. Instead of unity between the two 
leading German states, the old rivalry broke out again. This was an 
inestimable advantage to Russia, and it was this rivalry which 
necessitated the partition of Poland. ‘The conclusion of the treaty 
of Kainardji was a new blow to Austria. 1t was true that Russia did 
not retain any of her conquests, but the establishment of Tartar 
independence would undoubtedly give her an ever-ready pretext for 
intervention in Turkey. Asa counter-move to the treaty, Austria 
induced the Porte to cede the territory of Bukowina, which had once 
belonged to Transylvania, and served as a useful link between that 
province and the recent acquisitions in Poland, This act, which was 
accomplished without any pretence of consulting the other powers, 
excited great discontent both at Berlin and St. Petersburg, and 
Catharine would probably have gone to war if Frederick had not 
dissuaded her. The king had already noted in the first interview 
the ambitious character of the young emperor, and he was now 
determined to be on his guard against any further aggrandisement 
of Austria. To make matters worse, it was reported from Vienna 
that Kaunitz had used threatening language about the necessity of 
destroying Prussia, and had declared that if a new war arose the 
sword would not be sheathed until one or other of the two powers 
had been ruined. 

§ 14. While relations were thus strained, an event occurred which 


Av. 1777-1778. THE BAVARIAN SUCCESSION. 451 


threatened to invelve Europe once more ina general war. With the 
death of Maximilian Joseph of Bavaria (80 December, 1777) the 
younger branch of the house of Wittelsbach became extinct, and the 
electorate of Bavaria, which had been conferred upon them in 1623, 
came toan end. By virtue of the original partition in 1310, the duchy 
of Bavaria ought to pass to the elder branch of the family, repre- 
sented by Charles Theodore, the Elector Palatine. But Joseph saw 
the possibility of securing valuable additions to Austria which would 
round off the frontier on the west. The Austrian claims were 
legally worthless. They were based chiefly upon a gift of the 
Straubingen territory which Sigismund was said to have made in 
1426 to his son-in-law, Albert of Austria, but which had never 
taken effect and had since been utterly forgotten. It would be 
impossible to induce the diet to recognise such claims, but it might 
be possible to come to an understanding with the aged Charles 
Theodore, who had no legitimate children and was not likely to 
feel any very keen interest in his new inheritance. Without much 
difficulty the elector was half frightened, half induced to sign a 
treaty (3 January, 1778) by which he recognised the claims put 
forward by Austria, while the rest of Bavaria was guaranteed to 
him and his successors. Austrian troops were at once despatched 
to occupy the ceded districts. The condition of Europe seemed to 
assure the success of Joseph’s bold venture. France was bound to 
Austria both by treaty and by marriage alliance. England was too 
absorbed in the American war to dream of interfering on the con- 
tinent. Russia was occupied in a dispute with Turkey about affairs 
in the Crimea, and was likely to have her hands full. 

There was only one quarter from which opposition was to be 
expected, Prussia. Frederick promptly appealed to the fundamental 
laws of the Empire and declared his intention of upholding them 
with arms. But he could find no supporters except those who were 
immediately interested, the elector of Saxony, whose mother, as a 
sister of the late elector of Bavaria, had a legal claim to his allodial 
property, and Charles of Zweibriicken, the heir apparent of the 
childless Charles Theodore. ‘The other German princes, even the 
Protestants, refused to take any part in a contest which indirectly 
affected their most vital interests. Frederick, left to himself, 
despatched an army into Bohemia, where the Austrian troops had 
been joined by the emperor in person. But nothing came of the 
threatened hostilities. Frederick was unable to force on a battle, 
and the so-called war was little more than an armed negotiation. 
Maria Theresa, whose courage was somewhat cooled by advancing 
years, and who found herself more and more opposed to the 
views of her son, was anxious to make peace by withdrawing the 


452 : MODERN EUROPE. Cuap. xx, 


extravagant pretensions that had been advanced. And events 
soon occurred to cool the ardour of Kaunitz and even of Joseph 
himself. Louis XVI., in spite of his marriage with Marie 
Antoinette, the emperor’s sister, had just concluded a treaty with 
the American colonies and refused to hamper himself by embarking 
ina German war. At the same time Russia, not at all embarrassed 
by the Turkish difficulties, showed a distinct inclination to listen 
to Frederick’s appeals for aid, and had already addressed serious 
remonstrances to the court of Vienna. France and Russia under- 
took to mediate, and negotiations were opened in 1779 at Teschen, 
where peace was signed on the 13th of May. Austria withdrew 
the claims which had been recognised in the treaty with the 
Elector Palatine, and received the ‘‘ quarter of the Inn,” i.e. the 
district from Passau to Wildshut. Frederick’s eventual claims to 
the succession in the Franconian principalities of Anspach and 
Baireuth, which Austria had every interest in opposing, were recog- 
nised by the treaty. The claims of Saxony were bought off by a 
payment of four million thalers. The most unsatisfactory part of 
the treaty was that it was guaranteed by France and Russia, and 
thus a new cpportunity was offered for foreign powers to interfere 
in Germany. But, on the whole, it was a great triumph for 
Frederick and an equal humiliation for Joseph II. His schemes of 
agerandisement had been foiled by the prince in imitation of whom 
they had been undertaken, and he allowed Prussia to pose as the 
champion of the imperial laws and constitution which he, the head of 
the empire, had attempted to infringe. But in the next year the 
death of his mother (29 November, 1780) gave him the means of 
resuming his ambitious designs with greater independence and on 
a more extended scale. 


lV. Josern Il. anp THE LEAGUE oF PRINCES. 


§ 15. The memory of Maria Theresa is still affectionately cherished 
in Austria, not so much for the merits of her government as for 
her lofty character and courage, the purity of her domestic life, her 
devotion to her husband and children. She had saved Austria 
from the ruin and disintegration that had threatened the country 
on her accession, and her long reign had not passed without the accom- 
plishment of many useful reforms. The military administration 
had been completely altered under the auspices of Daun and Lascy, 
and at the close of the Seven Years’ War the Austrian army was 
no unequal match for the Prussians, who had been taken as a 
model. ‘The law courts had been purified and -their procedure 
improved. Financial affairs had made rapid strides under the 


A.D. 1779-1780. JOSEPH II. 453 


painstaking care of Francis I., whose qualities fitted him to be a 
man of business rather than an emperor. Tven in religious matters, 
in which Maria Theresa had been resolutely orthodox, persecution 
had been avoided. Hungary had been bound more closely to the 
monarchy, and thus an important step had been taken towards the 
concentration of the various provinces which had been brought to- 
gether in the course of centuries. But in all her actions Maria 
Theresa had been hampered by the traditions of the Hapsburg 
family, of which she was a loyal descendant, and in her later years 
she had shown more and more repugnance to reform. 

Her successor was not a Hapsburg at all, but a Lorrainer, and 
this serves to explain the lack of reverence with which he attacked 
the most cherished customs and deserted the oldest traditions of 
policy. He had already endeavoured to imitate Frederick II. in 
the management of foreign relations, he now aspired to copy his 
domestic government. The strength of Prussia he attributed to its 
marvellous centralisation, to the machine-like way in which every- 
thing moved in obedience to the royal will. This was the system 
which he wished to introduce into Austria, utterly forgetting that 
the way had been prepared for I*rederick by the exertions of his 
predecessors, whereas he succeeded to a state of which the govern- 
ment had been conducted for centuries on principles diametrically 
opposed to his own. No contrast can be more striking than that 
between the sternly practical activity of the Prussian king, who 
never set his arms too high and never stopped till he had reached 
them, and the doctrinaire and revolutionary haste with which the 
young emperor undertook the most sweeping reforms at the same 
moment, and long before they had been accomplished hurried on to 
other tasks which would have needed the work of generations. 
Joseph is like the boy playing with chemistry, who loves to mix 
together the strangest compounds and to produce startling results; _ 
Frederick treats his materials with the economy and straightforward 
purpose of the trained man of science. But it would be unfair to 
deny that a real enthusiasm for progress and love of humanity 
underlay the reforms of-Joseph IL, or that many of them wou'd 
have been of lasting and incalculable benefit if he had only been 
more prudent and practical in carrying them out. 

The great principle which underlay all the reforms of Joseph IT. 
was that no personal or class interest should stand. in the way of 
the general welfare, and of this welfare he was the sole judge and 
interpreter. It is easy to realise what enormous confusion would be 
created in any state by the attempt to carry such a principle into 
immediate action and without ample compensation. It is only fair 
to say that Joseph included himself among his own victims. The 


454. MODERN EUROPE. Gwar, xx, 


court expenses were immensely reduced, the emperor lived in the 
simplest and most inostentatious way, the pension list and even the 
allowances to the archdukes were cut down. The money thus 
saved was not used in reducing taxes, as had been fondly hoped, 
but in increasing a revenue which was still insufficient for the uses 
it was put to. The personal labour which Joseph undertook was 
immense; the attention and industry with which he studied every 
detail recall the bureaucratic activity of Philip II. The ministers 
were encouraged to apply for instruction upon all doubtful points, 
and the blindest obedience was exacted from them. The judicial 
administration was reformed so as to ensure the equality of all men 
before the law. The privileges of the feudal nobles, the exclusive 
corporations in the towns, the accumulation of unproductive wealth 
in the hands of the clergy, were simultaneous objects of attack. 
Perhaps none of the innumerabl: reforms of these years are more 
illustrative of the spirit in which their author worked than the 
attempt to abolish serfdom in the Austrian dominions. A first 
edict, limiting the rights of the lord to inflict punishments, was 
followed by others which gave the peasant personal freedom, 
allowed him to marry as he pleased, and compelled the lord to give 
his serfs property in land on receipt of a fair rent. The same 
spirit is seen in the cffort to raise the people from their super- 
stitious ignorance by founding and endowing schools for elementary 
education and by conferring complete liberty upon the press. — Less 
enlightened but equally characteristic were the measures taken to 
suppress the Magyar nationality in Hungary, by compelling the 
natives to adopt the German language and customs, and by abolish- 
ing the old constitution for a new centralised pao which was 
w orked by German officials. 

In all these changes a great share was jake by Kaunitz, the 
Chancellor, to whom the change of rulers must have been a great 
relief. He had always been a partisan of the new movement, and 
his leanings were strongly anti-clerical, but he had been compelled 
to disguise them out of deference to the mistress’ who had raised him 
to power. He had now to deal with a sovereign who was willing to 
go quite as far as himself and to whom he was bound by none of 
the old ties of dependence and gratitude. The minister ceased to 
attend the court almost altogether; the emperor paid him visits, 
as Louis XIV. had done to Mazarin. In religious matters the 
attitude of Kaunitz was.even more pronounced than that of Joseph, 
and these are perhaps the most conspicuous subjects of reform 
during the reign. .The church was made subservient to the state 
and freed from all dependence upon external authority. All papal 
bulls and briefs were to be submitted to the secular magistrates and 


A.D. 1780. JOSEPH II. 455 


were not to be circulated until they had received the imperial 
sanction. All newly elected bishops were to take their first oath 
of fealty to the emperor, so that no subsequent oath to the papacy 
should affect their primary obligations as subjects. Appeals from 
ecclesiastical consistories were to be made not to Rome but to the 
secular courts. All foreign ecclesiastics, heads of monasteries and 
others, were expelled and their places filled by natives. Those 
monastic orders which took no part in education, in hospital work, 
in preaching or at the confessional, but had been formed for a life of 
contemplation, such as the Carthusians, were abolished and their 
revenues confiscated. At the same time Joseph secured toleration 
and equal citizenship to all dissenters, whether Lutherans, Calvin- 
ists, or members of the Greek church. This measure marks the 
completeness of the departure from the policy which had been 
pursued by the Hapsburgs from Rudolf II. to Maria Theresa. 
Meanwhile Joseph II. had once more turned his attention to 
Germany, but no longer with the object of reviving or extending 
the central power over the innumerable large and petty states that 
owned his nominal sovereignty. ‘That scheme had failed once and 
for all, and he now resumed the old policy of the Hapsburgs, 
and determined to employ his position as emperor to extend the 
territorial influence of his family. He had already secured the 
election of his brother Maximilian to the archbishopric of Cologne 
and the bishopric of Miinster, and had thus obtained not only a 
strong supporter in the electoral college, but also a preponderating 
inflnence among the states of western Germany. ‘This was 
followed by a series of attacks upon the imperial constitution. 
There were a number of independent bishoprics, such as Salzburg 
and Passau, whose sees extended over Austrian territory. Joseph 
announced his intention of confiscating this part of their sees and 
transferring them to native bishoprics. These and other high- 
handed actions excited a feeling of dismay among those small states 
which clung to their territorial independence and to the old 
conception of “German liberty.” The natural appeal lay to the 
Diet, but the action of this assembly was nullified by the supremacy 
which Austria had established over the college of princes, as 
nothing could be done without the agreement of the three colleges. 
There was only one remedy left, the formation of a league against 
the emperor on the same principles as those of the League of 
Schmalkalde against Charles V. But to carry this out it was 
absolutely necessary to secure the support of some great power, and 
here there was considerable difficulty. France and Russia, the two 
guarantors of the treaty of Teschen, were out of the question, 
and the only hope lay in Prussia. But many of the injured states 


456 MODERN EUROPE. Cuap. XX, 


were held by Roman Catholic ecclesiastics, who had great scruples 
about accepting the protection of the leading Protestant state of 
Germany. Ultimately these scruples were overcome by the immi- 
nence of the danger, and an appeal for assistance was made to 
Berlin. 

§ 16. Frederick II. had foreseen the dangers which threatened both 
Germany and himself from the accession of Joseph, and had taken 
measures to meet them. His plan was to renew his close alliance 
with Russia, and to extend it by including Turkey and either 
England or France. This would enable him to check the ambition 
both of Catharine and Joseph, to uphold the integrity of the 
Turkish empire, and to act as an arbiter of European relations. 
But the plan was doomed to failure at the outset. At St. 
Petersburg the foreign minister Panin, who clung to the Prussian 
alliance, had been practically superseded by the Czarina’s favourite 
Potemkin, under whose influence Catharine threw herself into the 
most boundless schemes of aggrandisement at the expense of 
Turkey. From this time the watchword of Russian policy was the 
advance upon Constantinople. Frederick’s proposal of an alliance of 
which the Porte should be a member was wofully ill-timed and 
promptly rejected. Even if the king could be induced to fall in 
with the Russian scheme and to approve of the dismemberment of 
Turkey, it was obvious that his support could not be so valuable 
as that of Austria. And Austria was more than willing to meet 
Russia half-way. Kaunitz saw clearly that the great obstacle to 
the success of his policy had been the alliance between Russia and 
Prussia, which had been formed on the death of Elizabeth, and 
which had recently compelled the relinquishment of the designs 
upon Bavaria. If this alliance could be broken off, Joseph II. 
could pursue his schemes of aggrandisement both in the west and 
the east with every prospect of success. In 1780 Joseph and 
Catharine met together at Mohileff, and this interview led to the 
conclusion of a close personal alliance in the next year. ‘The 
result of this was clearly seen in 17838, when Russia, utilising the 
advantages it had secured by the treaty of Kainardji, forced the 
Porte to cede the Crimea and Kuban, and thus extended its frontier 
to the Black Sea. The consent of Austria to this aggrandisement 
was purchased by the tacit understanding that Russia would exert 
its influence in Germany to favour Joseph’s designs. 

_ The loss of the Russian alliance left Prussia completely isolated 
among the great powers. England was still occupied by the 
American war, and the ministry of Lord North was even hostile to 
Frederick. ‘The hopes that were based on the accession of the 
Whigs to office in 1782 were frustrated by their speedy downfall. 


A.D. 1780-1785. FREDERICK II. 457 


France was at war with England, and French policy was so feeble 
and vacillating that it offered no security for an alliance. Nothing 
remained for Frederick but to fall in with the suggestions of the 
German powers, and to form a league against the reckless 
aggressions of the emperor. He had occupied a somewhat similar 
position in his early years when he formed the Union of Frankfort 
to protect Charles VII. against Maria Theresa. Since then he had 
almost severed himself from the Empire and had devoted himself to 
the welfare of Prussia as an independent state. In his old age the 
former policy was once more forced upon him. In 1778 he had 
stood almost alone as the champion of the established laws of the 
Empire, now there was the prospect that he might obtain general 
support in the same cause. With all his accustomed energy he 
espoused the side of the princes against the emperor-and set-Limself 
to form a comprehensive league. But there was always great 
difficulty in inducing German states to combine together, and. 
Frederick’s efforts might have failed but for ps occurrence of anew 
danger. 

§ 17. Joseph I. had never given up his acl ns upon Bednar and. 
his understanding with igen enabled him ‘ % resume: them with 
greater prospect “of success. His plan was to» ‘obtain the coveted 
territory in exchange for the Netherlands. The latter had never 
been a very valuable territory to Austria, partly on account of 
their distance and partly through the commercial jealousy with 
which the provinces were regarded by England and Holland. 
Moreover the necessity of defending the Netherlands had always 
hampered Austria in its relations with the western powers, and 
especially with France. At this very time Joseph IIJ., whose 
activity extended to every part of his dominions, was endeavouring 
to force the Dutch to give up the barrier fortresses and to open the 
Scheldt. ‘The intervention of France brought about the treaty of 
Fontainebleau (November, 1785) by which the Barrier treaty was 
annulled, but Joseph withdrew his other demands on payment of 
nine million gulden, of which France contributed nearly half. It 
had always been a favourite idea at Vienna to exchange this 
troublesome possession in the west for some more conveniently 
situated territory. ‘The acquisition of Bavaria was also a long- 
cherished design and offered the most irresistible attractions. 
Charles Theodore was as easily gained over as before, and promised 
to give up Upper and Lower Bavaria, the Upper Palatinate, 
Neuburg, Sulzbach and Leuchtenberg, on condition that he should 
receive the whole of the Netherlands, except Namur and Luxem- 
burg, with the title of a kingdom of Burgundy. The Russian 


o>) 


agent, Romanzow, undertook the task of inducing Charles Theo- 
Pa 


458. MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. xx. 


dore’s heir, the duke of Zweibriicken, to give his consent to the 
transfer. . 

‘he news of this high-handed scheme, which threatened to 
revolutionisé the territorial relations of Germany, gave fresh 
energy to Frederick and convincing cogency to his representations. 
In July, 1785, the terms of union were arranged by the represen- 
tatives of Prussia, Saxony and Hanover. In a very short time 
they were accepted by the rulers of Zweibriicken, Weimar, Gotha, 
Hesse-Cassel, Brunswick, Baden, Mecklenburg, Anhalt and many 
other. princes.. But the great triumph of the Liirstenbund, as it 
was called, was the adhesion of the archbishop of Mainz, the 
arch-chancellor of Germany, president of the electoral college, and 
the chief ecclesiastical magnate of the empire. This important 
negotiation was entrusted by Frederick to a man who was destined 
to play a great part in Prussia, the Baron vom Stein, then only 
twenty-seven years old. The expressed object of the league was 
the maintenance of the existing constitution of the empire, as 
established by the peace of Westphalia, and the protection of 
individual states against unlawful aggression. In secret articles it 
was agreed to oppose the projected exchange of Bavaria for the 
Netherlands and all schemes of secularisation and partition, if 
necessary with arms. 

The league was completely successful in its immediate object. 
Joseph and Charles Theodore not only gave up the project but 
tried to disavow it. But many members hoped that it might prove 
a new starting-point for the federal unity of Germany. If these 
hopes had been realised, Prussia would have gained a very 
substantial victory over Austiia, and might have established a 
hegemony almost as definite as that which it has now attained. 
Viewed in this aspect, the league was regarded with disfavour 
by France and Russia. Russia looked to gain great advantages 
from its Austrian alliance and was naturally opposed to the 
weakening of its ally. France was beginning to draw aloof from 
the court of Vienna, and had always been inclined to support any 
combination of German princes against the Hapsburgs. But the 
league which France desired was a league of princes in opposition 
both to Austria and Prussia, not one in which Prussia was the 
directing heal. None of these fears or hopes, however, came to 
anything. ‘The league was never anything more than a temporary 
and successful measure of defence, and it practically perished with 
the death of its founder. 

The formation of the Fiirstenbund was the last great achieve- 
ment of Frederick the Great, whose reign of 46 years closed on the 
17th of August, 1786. There can be no question that he stands a 


A.D. 1785-1786. DEATH OF FREDERICK II. 459 


head and shoulders above the rulers-of the century. Even if one 
estimates morality with intellect there is only one man—George 
Washington—who can be ranked with him. He succeeded to a 
state whose internal condition by no means corresponded with the 
greatness to which he intended to raise it. Its soil was the poorest 
in Germany, its territories were scattered and its boundaries so un- 
satisfactory that it was exposed to invasion on every side. This 
was the state which in two exhausting wars had won for itself a 
place among the great powers of Europe, and which had developed 
its resources to a marvellous extent during two unequal periods of 
peace. ‘From a territory of 2800 square miles and a population of 
little over two millions had grown a state of 8600 square miles and 
six million inhabitants: the army which his father had left him 
had been increased from 76,000 to 200,000; the revenue of 12 
millions had been nearly doubled; the exchequer, in spite of the 
terrible wars, was filled with some 70,000 thalers. The cultivation 
of the land, the activity of its inhabitants, the order and care of 
the administration were-everywhere as flourishing as the military 
power and the diplomacy of Prussia.” This progress was due almost 
solely to the king and to the marvellous administrative system 
which he had organised. The strength and the weakness of the 
system lay in its dependence upon a single mind and will. When 
the guiding genius was removed it became a mere inanimate 
‘machine and could no longet produce the expected result. This 
explains the verdict of those judges who have attributed to the 
administration founded by Frederick the subsequent decline of 
russia. It is no less true because paradoxical that without that 
administration Prussia would not have risen to greatness. 


V. Tue Eastern QUESTION, 1786-1792. 


§ 18. The importance to Prussia of Frederick the Great’s personal 
guidance is manifested by the events that followed his death. He 
was succeeded by his nephew Frederick William II., the son of 
Augustus William, who had incurred his brother’s displeasure in 
the Seven Years’ War and had died soon afterwards. The new 
king was made of far weaker metal than his predecessor, more 
amiable and equally devoted to his subjects’ welfare, but: less 
independent in his opinions and actions and more prone to be 
guided by impulse than by caution. Two unfortunate marriages 
had ruined his chances of domestic happiness, and made him the 
slave of mistresses who aspired to play in Prussia the part which 
Madame de Pompadour had played in France. And Frederick 
William to some extent resembled the French kings in the com- 


460 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. xx, 


bination of immorality with religious superstition. His accession, 
however, was welcomed with great popular rejoicings, and he 
received the name of the ‘well-beloved.” It was expected that 
the new government wouid free the state from those excessive 
burdens which Frederick’s ambition had imposed upon it, and to 
some extent these hopes were fulfilled. The royal monopolies were 
abolished and the French officials dismissed. But these and 
other measures of relief proved fallacious: Prussia could not exist 
without an ample revenue, and other forms of taxation had to be 
employed to make up the deficit. Frederick William’s popularity 
was soon at anend. In religious matters he sought, under the in- 
fluence of his favourite ministers, Wollner and Bisschofswerder, to 
effect a complete reaction. In July, 1788, he issued an edict 
forbidding the teachings of “Socinians, Deists, Naturalists and 
other sects,” and a system of examination was introduced to test the 
orthodoxy of candidates for orders. ‘This was a direct departure 
from the almost contemptuous toleration of Frederick II. and was 
hailed with a chorus of disapproval. But the government adhered 
to its plan and endeavoured to put down opposition by reviving the 
censorship of the press (Dec. 1788). 

These domestic changes and scandals would have been of slight 
moment if Prussia had been able to maintainits position among the 
European powers. for some years the policy of Frederick was 
carried out under the guidance of Hertzberg, a minister who had 
been trained by the great king and had completely assimilated the 
system of his master’s Jater years. The first interference of Prussia 
in foreign politics was connected with affairs in Holland. In that 
country the old rivalry between the republican party and the sup- 
porters of the house of Orange was as bitter as ever. The second 
branch of the family, which obtained the stadtholdership in 1748, 
had failed to produce such distinguished rulers as those who had given 
such glory to the first dynasty. The republicans, who belonged 
mostly to the aristocratic and wealthy classes, were supreme in the 
province of Holland and especially in Amsterdam, while the partisans 
of the stadtholder were popular with the mass of the people and had 
the upper hand in Zealand and Guelders. Ever since the high- 
handed attempt of Joseph II. to get rid of the Barrier treaty and 
to open the Scheldt, French influence had extended itself widely in 
the country. As the ruling family was closely allied with England, 
France joined the republicans to bring about the overthrow of the 
stadtholder. At the time of Frederick William’s accession the quarrel 
had almost developed into a regular civilwar. He had a direct per- 
sonal interest in Dutch affairs, as the present stadtholder, William V. 
(1751-1802), was married to his sister. But in spite of this he 


A.D. 1786-1788. THE EASTERN QUESTION. 461 


was unwilling to engage in a war, and endeavoured to arrangé a com- 
promise in conjunction with France. This attempt at mediation, 
however, came to nothing, and an insult to his sister roused the 
wrath of the susceptible king. In 1787 Prussian troops entered 
Holland, and in an incredibly short space of time overawed opposition 
and restored the stadtholder to the Hague. This was a real though 
easy triumph over France, and was followed in 1788 by the conclusion 
of important treaties at the Hague with Holland and England, which 
gave Prussia for the moment a commanding position in Kurope. 
But it was unfortunate that this success gave increased strength to 
the feeling of self-confidence which was Frederick’s most fatal bequest 
to Prussia. This result is conspicuously visible in the attitude 
which Hertzberg now assumed in the infinitely more important 
affairs in Eastern Europe, and still more perhaps in the later inter- 
vention of Prussia against the French republic. 

§ 19. The alliance between Austria and Russia, which Frederick II. 
had regarded with such mistrust, was now the all-important factor in 
eastern politics. But so far the Russians had carried off all the profit 
of the alliance. They had annexed the Crimea and Kuban, and 
had forced the Porte to sanction the annexation. And Catharine 
and Potemkin were not yet satistied, but were contemplating further 
acquisitions which should bring them nearer to Constantinople. 
Joseph II. could not disguise his misgivings for the consequences of 
his reckless policy. ‘The advance of Russian power to his frontiers 
could not but be in the highest degree dangerous to Austria. And 
the compensating advantages in Bavaria and Holland, to obtain 
which he had entered into the alliance, had slipped from his grasp. 
There were now only two alternatives to choose between, either to 
turn round and vigorously oppose the Russians, in which case he 
could obtain the support of Prussia, or to draw the alliance still 
closer so as to share what booty might still be obtained. He found 
himself too deeply involved to draw back, and therefore had to 
choose the latter plan. In 1787 Catharine paid her famous visit to 
the newly acquired provinces of her empire, in which Potemkin 
employed all the resources of art to disguise their natural desolation. 
Joseph joined Catharine and renewed his alliance with her. From 
this time Russia employed every means to force the Porte into 
war, as Austria was only pledged to assistance in case of an 
attack. The plan was completely successful. The Turks thought 
that they could rely upon help from Prussia and England, both 
of which powers had expressed their hostility to the Russian lust 
of aggrandisement, and in August, 1787, they issued a formal 
declaration of war. In the following February Joseph II. declared 
his intention of coming to the help of Russia, and Turkey was 


462 . MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. xx. 


exposed to the simultaneous attack of its two most powerful 
neighbours. 

Now or never was the time for Prussia to interfere. There was a 
strong party at Berlin which wished for immediate war. ‘hey urged 
that Sweden and Poland, where the majority of the nobles were 
eager to get rid of Russian domination, should be induced to attack 
Russia, and that the whole force of Prussia should be employed 
against Austria, which could be humbled in three campaigns. The 
reward for this energetic action was to be the conquest of the 
rest of Silesia and parts of Bohemia and Moravia. But Hertzberg 
clung to Frederick’s policy of avoiding hostilities, and he had a plan 
of his own for settling all difficulties. He contended that Prussia 
rendered a great service to the Turks by compelling the emperor to 
retain a large part of his forces upon his northern frontier, and in 
recognition of this the Porte was to call upon Prussia to mediate a 
peace. As mediator, he wished to arrange a complicated scheme 
of cessions and counter-cessions of territory on the model of the 
recent partition of Poland. ‘Turkey was to give up Moldavia and 
Wallachia to Austria, and the Crimea and Bessarabia to Russia, 
and in return for this was to be protected from further losses by a 
European guarantee of the Danube as its northern frontier, and by 
an engagement on the part of Russia to desist from further interfer- 
ence in its internal affairs. Austria was to purchase Moldavia and 
Wallachia by restoring Galicia to Poland, and in return for this 
Poland was to hand over Danzig and Thorn to Prussia. Russia, on 
the other hand, was to restore part of Finland to the Swedes, who 
were to give to Prussia their remaining possessions in Pomerania. 
But it was obvious that only a very favourable combination of cir- 
cumstances could enable Prussia thus to dictate her will to Europe. 
In the first place, the Turks were by no means disposed to make such 
sacrifices of territory without compulsion, or to regard a guarantee 
of the Kuropean powers as a sufficient compensation. Moreover the 
manifest selfishness of the scheme was certain to arouse the jealousy 
which the other powers had never ceased to feel towards Prussia 
since the first aggressions of Frederick Il. Hertzberg, however, 
succeeded in carrying his point at Berlin. Prussia abstained from 
taking open part in the war, and waited for the opportunity to inter- 
fere as mediator. The Turks were bitterly enraged at losing the 
support which they had confidently expected. 

§ 20. The course of the war did not at first seem likely to realise 
Hertzberg’s anticipations of the Turks being forced to give way. 
An attack upon the Crimea was repulsed by Suwarow, who won a 
great military reputation in this war, but Potemkin’s attempt to 
take Oczakow was for a long time foiled by the obstinate courage 


A.D. 1788-1790. THE EASTERN QUESTION. 463 


of the garrison. The Austrians were still less successful. Joseph, 
who took the command in person, had no military genius, and his 
chief adviser, Lascy, was an administrator rather than a general. 
The forces were weakened by being spread over an enormous line of 
frontier from Galicia to the Adriatic, and it was not until late in 
the season that Joseph made an attack upon Belgrad which was 
repulsed. At the same time Gustavus III. of Sweden, who had 
overthrown the oligarchy by a successful revolution in 1772, but 
had since been opposed by Russian intrigues, seized the opportunity 
to invade Finland, and announced his intention of advancing to St. 
Petersburg. An attempt of Russia to form an effective alliance 
with Poland was frustrated by Prussian influence, and a threatened 
diversion against Sweden by the forces of Denmark was prevented 
by the conclusion of the triple alliance between Prussia, England and 
Holland. ‘These powers set themselves in distinct opposition to the 
schemes of Austria and Russia, and formed an important counter- 
balancing force to the eastern combination. The Turks were 
inspired with the greatest confidence, and even Hertzberg was 
beginning to meditate a revival of his scheme of mediation, when 
fortune began to turn in the last days of the year. In Decem- 
ber Potemkin, wearied and enraged by his failure to take Oczakow, 
ordered a last assault. The savage energy of the Russians carried 
them over the defences, and they sated their wrath in a reckless 
massacre of the inhabitants. In 1789 the Sultan, Abdul Hamid, 
died, but his successor, Selim LII., prosecuted the war with un- 
diminished energy. The Russian successes, however, continued, 
and both Suwarow and Poternkin gained decisive victories. The 
appointment of the veteran Laudon inspired a new spirit into the 
Austrian army; in October he forced Osman Pacha to surrender 
Belgrad, and followed this up by capturing Semendria and 
Passarowitz. Russia was freed from what had at one time seemed 
a serious danger by the repulse of the Swedes, and in 1790 
Gustavus III. had to conclude the treaty of Werela, which restored 
matters to their condition before the war. 

§ 21. These occurrences seemed to bring Hertzberg nearer to his 
desired end, but he had still the difficult task of making his terms 
with the Porte. The negotiations were carried on by the Prussian 
ambassador at Constantinople, Diez, who was opposed by the 
minister’s policy and had always urged that the Turks should be 
openly supported by Russia. Diez allowed himself to be persuaded 
into signing a treaty on the 31st of January, 1790, which conceded 
more to Turkey than was allowed by his instructions. Nothing 
was said of a Prussian mediation, which was to be rewarded with 
the cession of Danzig and Thorn, but Prussia was committed toa 


464 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. xx. 


defensive and offensive alliance with the Porte, which was not to 
terminate until Russia had been compelled to restore its recent 
acquisitions. Hertzberg was in a dilemma; he recalled Diez, 
and postponed as long as pussible the ratification of the treaty. 
But at the same time great military preparations were made, and 
there could be no doubt that circumstances were not at all 
unfavourable for active intervention. In Poland the Diet had 
definitely declared in favour of a Prussian alliance, and Sweden 
was still engaged in hostilities against Russia. The emperor’s 
reforming activity had raised the most serious discontent among 
his subjects. Hungary was on the verge of revolt, and the 
Austrian Netherlands had overthrown the government and formed 
themselves into a Belgian republic. France was unable, on account 
of internal disturbances, to come to the assistance of Austria, 
whereas Prussia could count upon five close allies, England, 
Holland, Sweden, Poland and Turkey. Hertzberg had no scruples 
about supporting a revolutionary movement, and was quite ready to 
welcome help from any quarter, from the malcontents in Hungary, 
Belgium, or even France. It was a momentous question for Hurope 
at the beginning of 1790 whether Prussia would really employ all 
the forces of the western coalition to humiliate Austria and Russia. 


Not only might the power of the two eastern empires have been’ 


crippled, but the revolutionary movement in France would have 
proceeded on its course without receiving fresh fuel from foreign 
interference. ‘The decision of the question rested with Frederick 
William II. and Hertzberg, and their ultimate choice was decided 
mainly by two influences, the growing conviction that events in 
France were endangering the security ef all Europe, and secondly 
the change in Austrian policy produced by the death of Joseph I. 
(20 Feb., 1790). 

Joseph sadly acknowledged to himself on his death-bed that all 
his grand schemes had failed. He had wished to elevate and civilise 
his subjects, and he had earned their hatred instead of gratitude. 
He had planned to consolidate the Austrian provinces under a 
centralised monarchy, and he left the state on the very verge of 
complete dissolution. He had hoped to add territories to his rule, 
and at the time of his death it seemed probable that his existing 
dominions would be dismembered by an attack from Prussia and 
Prussia’s allies. It was fortunate for Austria in this crisis that the 
crown fell to so able a prince as Leopold II., who succeeded to his 
childless brother. Leopold was also a partisan of the new move- 
ment, and had carried on an enlightened and successful government 
in the grand duchy of Tuscany. But at the same time he was 
less obstinately enslaved to theories and more conciliatory in his 


: 
ee 


A.D. 1790. LEOPOLD IL. 465 


dealings with hostile interests. His first task was to put an end 
to domestic discontent, and this he did by concessions. ‘To Hungary 
he restored the diet and the old constitution of the kingdom, and 
everywhere he redressed some, at any rate, of the grievances of the 
nobles and clergy. The reaction extended itself to the court 
arrangements, which recovered some of their old magnificence, and 
the liberty of the press was restricted by the restoration of the 
censorship. But the great problem of the new ruler lay in the 
settlement of foreign complications, as while they lasted the 
monarchy must be insecure. He determined at once to resign all 
the ambitious schemes of aggrandisement which his brother had 
entertained, to withdraw from the Turkish war, and so to avoid the 
threatened attack from Prussia. With the cautious foresight that 
characterised all his actions he addressed himself, not to Hertzberg, 
but to Frederick William himself. The minister was naturally 
tenacious of a policy which was his own creation, the king was 
never tenacious of anything. In his letter Leopold urged that he 
had no desire of increasing his territories, and that he would gladly 
accept the frontiers of the treaty of Passarowitz, and he laid great 
stress on the glory which the king would obtain by mediating a 
moderate and permanent peace. Frederick William was impressed 
by this personal appeal, but he could not at once overthrow the 
minister whom he had hitherto supported, and his answer proposed 
the interchange of territories which would give Prussia Danzig and 
Thorn. Leopold’s refusal was clear and unhesitating. The negoti- 
ations were broken off, both Austria and Prussia assembled troops 
in their respective frontiers, and war seemed more inevitable than 
over. But events soon occurred which shook Frederick William’s 
never very stable resolution. It appeared that the allies of Prussia 
were by no means eager supporters of Hertzberg’s elaborate scheme. 
England was just now engaged in a quarrel with Spain about 
colonial questions in California, and had no interest in securing 
Prussian supremacy in the Baltic. If Austria would make peace on 
condition that matters should return to their condition before the 
war, that was also the wish of England, and by implication of 
Holland. At the same time the Poles, though they had concluded 
an alliance with Prussia (March, 1790), were not at all willing to 
give up Danzig and Thorn. Frederick William discovered that 
even if he overcame the unwillingness of Austria, he would still have 
to face the opposition of his allies. This was sufficient to decide 
a king who always sought to find the easiest way of getting out 
of difficulties, and who was also not insensible of the credit which 
he could claim if he proved his unselfishness in the eyes of Europe. 
Leopold adroitly managed matters so that the proposal came from 


466 MODERN EUROPE. CuHap. xx. 


Prussia and was accepted as a concession on the part of Austria. 
By the treaty of Reichenbach (27 July, 1790) Austria engaged to 
restore all her conquests to Turkey and to grant an animesty and 
their old constitution to the Belgians. _ Hertzberg, who was com- 
pletely disconcerted at the turn which affairs had taken, could only 
secure the insertion of a clause by which, if Austria did make any 
small acquisition of Turkish territory, it should be with the free 
will of the Porte, and Prussia was to get an equivalent. 

The treaty of Reichenbach, as competent observers saw at the time, 
marks the first retreat from the policy of Frederick the Great and 
the first step in the decline of Prussia. A state which had risea to 
greatness by straining all its resources to the uttermost, must either 
advance or fall; the slightest retrograde step, which a firmly 
established power could take without danger, must be fatal. The 
consequences of the loss of prestige are clearly visible in the 
subsequent. events. Sweden, Poland and Turkey, hitherto the 
docile clients of Prussia, passed over to Austria. Leopold could 
afford to disregard the express provisions of the recent treaty. The 
Belgian revolt was put down with severity, and the people 
clamoured against the treacherous power that had encouraged only 
to desert them. ‘The peace with the Turks, to settle which a 
conzress met at Sistowa, was postponed until August, 1791, and 
then the Porte had to cede tlie district of Orsowa in direct violation 
of the treaty of Reichenbach. About the same time Russia, which 
had continued to gain victories without its ally, had concluded the 
preliminaries of a peace at Galatz (11 August, 1/91). Further 
negotiations were entrusted to Potemkin, but he died before 
anything had been settled (15 October). His death removed the 
greatest obstacle to peace, and the final treaty was signed at Jassy 
in January, 1792. Turkey gave up Oczakow to Russia, and the 
Dniester was fixed as the boundary between the two states. 


VI. Tue Secoxp axpd Tuirp Partirions or PoLAND. 


-§ 22. Ever since the first partition of Poland, the unfortunate 
Stanislaus Poniatowski and. his reduced kingdom had remained in 
complete vassalage to Russia. But the outbreak of the Turkish war 
in 1787 and the occupation of the Russian troops on the Danube 
and in the Crimea seemed to offer a favourable chance of throwing 
off this humiliating yoke. England and Prussia formed a league 
for the repression of Russia, and the Poles determined to appeal tor 
Prussian assistance. ‘Their demand was favourably entertained by 
Hertzberg, who wished to realise a great object of Frederick the 
Great by acquiring Danzig and Thorn, and a treaty was signed 


A.D. 1787-1792. POLISH CONSTITUTION. 467 


in March, 1790. The prospect of recovering their independence, 
combined with the spread of reforming ideas from France, gave a 
great impulse to the party which desired to strengthen Poland by 
changing its constitution. Stanislaus was induced to join the 
reformers, and on the 3rd of May, 1790, a new constitution was 
accepted by the diet. Its object was to transform the anarchical 
republic into an orderly and constitutional monarchy. The right 
of election was abolished and the crown made hereditary. Stanis- 
laus, who was childless, was to be succeeded by Frederick Augustus 
of Saxony, and he by his daughter, who was proclaimed “ Infanta 
of Poland,” and whose descendants, it was hoped, would form a 
new and independent dynasty of Polish kings. The executive 
power was to be in the hands of the king and a responsible council 
of ministers, the legislative functions were to be shared between a 
senate and an elective diet. The liberwm-veto and the right of 
confederation, the source of so many evils, were abolished. The 
Roman Catholic religion was recognised as that of the state, but 
other forms of belief were to be tolerated. 

This grand reform, which was carried through the diet by an art- 
fully planned surprise and which by no means represented the unani- 
mous wishes of the Poles, was ccmpletely unexpected by the three 
neighbouring powers. Russia was profoundly irritated, and Catha- 
rine only waited for a favourable opportunity to take summary 
vengeance. Prussia, already alienated by the obstinacy with which 
the Poles clung to Danzig and Thorn, was bitterly opposed to the 
formation of a strong monarchical state in its immediate neighbour- 
hood. On the other hand Leopold II., though he had nothing to 
do with the introduction of the constitution, was completely 
satisfied with it. A strong and independent Poland formed the 
best and most satisfactory bulwark against the westward advance 
of Russia. He determined therefore to do all he could for the 
maintenance of the constitution, and he was favoured by the close 
relation in which he was brought to Prussia by their common 
interests in regard to France. In July, 1790, he succeeded in 
inducing the Prussian envoy to sign the preliminaries of a treaty in 
which “the free constitution of Poland” was expressly guaranteed. 
But in the final treaty of February, 1791, a slight but important 
alteration was made by the substitution of the words “a free 
constitution of Poland.” 

Meanwhile Catharine II. had done all in her power to involve 
Austria and Prussia in a war with France in order to secure 
herself from their intervention in the east. In January, 1792, she 
concluded the peace of Jassy with the Turks, and at once ordered 
her troops to march into Poland. They were aided by a party 


468 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. xx. 


among the Poles themselves, who formed the Confederation of 
Targowicz, revived the old name of “ patriots,” and demanded the 
restoration of “liberty” and their old constitution. Stanislaus and 
his adherents appealed for assistance to Prussia, but there the ill- 
feeling against the constitution had been increased by a subsequent 
proposal to substitute for the daughter the brother of the elector of 
Saxony, and so to perpetuate the connection between Saxony and 
Poland. Frederick William refused his assistance and offered no 
opposition to the Russian troops, who speedily made themselves 
masters of the hapless and still divided country. Austria was the 
only state from which resistance was to be feared, and here good 
fortune came to the aid of the Czarina. On the first of March 
Leopold II.’s short. but successful reign was ended by a sudden and 
unexpected death, which involved important consequences both to 
Austria and to Europe. Six weeks later the war with France was 
actually commenced, and the Austrian troops had to defend 
Belgium from invasion. These events removed all difficulties from 
the way of Russia. Prussia was averse to the aggrandisement of 
her eastern neighbour, but was not willing to move a hand for 
the constitution of 1790. Austria thoroughly approved of the 
constitution, Francis II. was as anxious as his father had been to 
oppose the ambition of Catharine, but armed intervention was 
impossible. ‘The Poles, divided among themselves and with no 
hope of foreign assistance, could make no effective resistance. The 
feeble Stanislaus was terrified into deserting his party and joining the 
Confederation of Targowicz. The constitution was formally abolished 
at the dictation of Russia, the old anarchy was restored under the 
name of “liberty,” and the leaders of the reforming party fled from 
the country. 

§ 23. Catharine IJ. had triumphed, but she felt that the victory 
could not be permanent as long as the two great rival powers re- 
garded Russian influence in Poland with envy and mistrust. Almost 
at the moment that her troops entered the kingdom she suggested 
a partition. Austria being still clamorous for Polish independence 
and the constitution of 1790, she turned to Prussia, whose inte- 
rests did not lie at any rate in that direction. ‘The change of 


policy which had resulted in the treaty of Reichenbach and the fall - 


of Hertzberg had been mainly the work of Frederick William 
himself, and had never been acceptable to the courtiers at Berlin, 
who inherited the traditional jealousy of Austria from the time of 
Frederick the Great. While there was no desire to truckle to 
Catharine, there was a strong feeling that it was better to profit 
by a Russian alliance than to court disaster by adherence to the 
cause of a natural and treacherous foe, Between Berlin and 


A.D. 1792-1793. SECOND PARTITION OF POLAND. 469 


St. Petersburg there were nothing but details to settle, and to gain 
over Austria the Russian envoy proposed to revive the project of 
effecting an exchange of the Netherlands for Bavaria. Throughout 
the second half of 1792 incessant negotiations were carried on upon 
this point, whether Austria would on this condition consent to the 
aggrandisement of Russia and Prussia in Poland. But the 
difficulties proved insuperable. Frederick William was willing to 
approve the projected exchange, but he refused to employ force to 
overcome any unwillingness of the rulers of Bavaria. Austria was 
not eager to allow a great and immediate advantage to Prussia in 
return for the doubtful and distant prospect of an advantage to 
herself, which after all was nothing more than an improvement of 
frontier. It was demanded that to Bavaria should be added the 
old Hohenzollern principalities of Baireuth and Anspach, which had 
recently fallen in to Frederick William. This was refused by the 
king, and the conquest of Belgium by Dumouriez at the end of the 
year made the whole proposal more doubtful and visionary than 
ever. Ultimately Russia and Prussia determined to settle the 
matter by themselves, and on the 28rd of January, 1793, the second 
treaty of partition was concluded and was carefully kept a secret 
from Austria. After arranging the extent of territory which was 
to go to each power, the treaty provided _that—Russia and Prussia 
should employ their “good services” to effect the exchange of 
Belgium for Bavaria, that Frederick William should continue his 
present exertions against France, and that he should not lay down 
arms until the object of the war, the suppression of disorder, should 
be attained. 

Before this, on the 6th of January, the king cf Prussia had 
issued a manifesto in which he announced his intention of interfering 
to put down the anarchy in Poland, which he attributed to Jacobin 
influences, Eight days later his troops crossed the frontier, and in 
a short time occupied the stipulated territories. ‘This energetic 
example was followed by Russia with the same success. ‘lhe share 
of Prussia, consisting of the coveted towns of Danzig and Thorn, 
with the provinces of Great Poland, Posen, Geresen and Kalisch, 
contained more than a thousand square miles, with a population of 
about a million and a half. The Russian acquisitions in Eastern 
Poland were four times as great in extent, and comprised twice as 
many inhabitants. It was not till the 23rd of March that the news 
reached Vienna, where it excited the most profound indignation. 
The existing ministers were dismissed, and the conduct of foreign 
affairs was entrusted to Thugut, who directed them for the next 
seven years with little credit to himself and with less profit to his 
country. He definitely refused to accept the treaty of partition, 


470 MODERN EUROPE. - CHap. xx: 


pointed out the utter inadequacy of the terms that were offered, and 
demanded that Austria should receive immediate compensation in 
Poland. But the two powers continued ‘their task without any 
regard to either demands or threats. A diet was summoned ‘at 
Grodno to legalise by its consent the act of robbery that had been 
already executed. In spite of the care with which the diet.was 


packed, and the presence of armed force to intimidate its members, 


they showed some lingering signs of patriotism. It was against 
Prussia, as a recent ally, that the greatest indignation was felt. On 
the 23rd of July the Russian demands were granted, and an attempt 
was made to induce the Czarina to throw over the Prussian cause. 
For a time there was a serious alarm at Berlin lest all the fruits of 
their exertions might be lost, but at last the difficulties were over- 
come, and on the 22nd of September, in the famous “ dumb sitting,” 
the partition was finally accepted. Austria was indignant but 
powerless. When it is remembered that these events took place at 
the crisis of the revolutionary war, it may be easily. understood how 
this undisguised quarrel about Poland tended to weaken and 
dissolve the coalition against France. ‘The remaining part of 
Poland became practically a vassal state of Russia. The un- 
fortunate Stanislaus was compelled to accept a humiliating treaty, 
known as the “eternal alliance” (14 Oct-.), by which the Poles were 
bound to make no change in their constitution, and to enter into no 
agreement with foreign powers, without express permission from the 
Czarina. ; bette’ p 1 

§ 24. The Polish malcontents were cowed rather than conquered. 
In March, 1794, an attempt of General Igelstrom, the Russian re- 
presentative at Warsaw, to diminish the.small remaining native 


army, provoked a rising in Krakau which speedily assumed. 


formidable dimensions. Kosciusko, who had served under Wash- 
ington in the war of American independence, and who had been a 
leading promoter of the reform of 1790, arrived from his refuge in 
Saxony and was appointed generalissimo. On the 4th of March ‘he 
gained a slight success over the Russian forces, and on the 18th a 
desperate rising of the people expelled Igelstrom and his troops 
from Warsaw. Stanislaus, the puppet of fortune, now offered to 
acknowledge the constitution once more, but he was no longer 
trusted, and though allowed to retain the royal title, he was 
practically superseded by Kosciusko. Rapidly as the insurrection 
had gained ground, it was evident to any dispassionate observer 
that it could not be permanently successful, and it must lead 
sooner or later to the absorption of Poland by its powerful and 
unscrupulous neighbours. The ministers at Berlin clearly per- 
ceived this, and determined by active measures to secure their share 


— 


A.D. 1793-1795. THIRD PARTITION OF POLAND. 471 


of the booty. At the beginning of June, Prussian troops crossed 
the frontier, on the 6th they defeated Kosciusko at Rawka, on the 
15th Krakau was taken. A rapid march must have resulted in 
the fall of Warsaw and the collapse of the insurrection... But 
valuable time was wasted before the siege was commenced, even 
then it was only languidly pressed; and before long a rising in the 
recently annexed provinces compelled the Prussians to retire. But 
by this time the Russians under Suwarow had entered Poland. 
On the 4th of October, Kosciusko, who had previously suffered 
several minor reverses, was completely defeated at Maciejowice and 
taken prisoner. With him fell the last hope cf Polish independence. 
On the 4th of November the Russians stormed Praga, and put the 
whole population, men, women and children, to death. Four days 
later Warsaw surrendered, and the whole kingdom lay at the mae 
of the conquerors. 

Prussia having failed in arms, now resorted to cis rane and 
Tauenzien was sent to St. Petersburg to arrauge a partition treaty 
with Russia on the model of that of 1793. But it was soon 
apparent that Catharine was determined, upon this occasion, to 
favour Austria. ‘The motives of her policy are fairly obvious. It 
was the interest of Russia to balance the two great German powers 
against each other, and therefore to grant them alternate acquisitions 
in Poland. Prussia had recently thwarted Catharine’s wishes by 
opening negotiations with the French which led up to the treaty of 
Basel. Moreover Thugut, the Austrian minister, was willing to 
conciliate Russia by renewing that aggressive alliance against 
Turkey which had been so fatal a defect in the policy of Joseph II. 
Tauenzien discovercd that everything was being arranged without 
his participation, and left St. Petersburg after making a futile 
protest. On the 8rd of January, 1795, the final partition was 
arranged between Austria and Russia. Russia was to have the lion’s 
share, about 2000 square miles, while Austria received about 1000 
square miles, with the town of Krakau. The remainder, amounting 
to over 700 square miles, and including Warsaw, was assigned to 
Prussia. 

On the same day the two contracting powers signed a secret 
declaration which has only recently been discovered. Austria was 
to accept the treaty of January, 1793, and the terms there inserted 
about the exchange of the Netherlands for Bavaria; she was to - 
guarantee the Russian possessions in Poland; a similar guarantee 
was to be extended to the Prussian possessions when Prussia had 
acceded to the present treaty of partition. In case of a war with 
Turkey, Austria was to assist with all her forces in compelling the 
Porte to cede Moldavia, Wallachia, and Bessarabia, and these 


472 MODERN EUROPE. Cuar. xx, 


provinces were to be formed into an appanage for a member of the 
imperial family of Russia. For this Austria was to be compensated 
by acquisitions to be made, if possible, in France; but if that failed, 
then at the expense of Venice. ‘This declaration was never carried 
out, and its existence was never suspected for half a century, but 
it throws a lurid light upon the selfish and treacherous diplomacy 
of those days, and upon the reckless policy of aggrandisement 
pursued by Thugut. 

In March, 1795, the duke of Courland, Peter Biren, was compelled 
to abdicate, and his duchy was made into a Russian province. On 
the 24th of October the partition of Poland was finally settled by 
the adhesion of Prussia to the treaty of the 3rd of January. This 
adhesion was given with great reluctance, and after much futile 
grumbling. The greatest objection was felt to giving up Krakau, 
which was in Prussian hands, to Austria. But Russia silenced every 
objection by refusing to give up Warsaw as long as Prussia retained 
Krakau. Thus perished a kingdom which had once played a great 
part in Europe, but which owed its downfall quite as much to its 
anarchical constitution and to its want of all the essentials of a 
sound state, as to the unprincipled greed of its neighbours. 
Stanislaus Poniatowski, who had been nominal king since 1764, 
was compelled without difficulty to abdicate. On the death of 
Catharine IT. (17 Nov. 1796), his mistress in both senses of the 
word, he took up his residence in St. Petersburg, where he died 
in 1798. Kosciusko, the real hero of the last period of Polish 
independence, was released from prison by Paul L., and, after several 
changes of residence, died in Switzerland in 1817. 


CHAPTER XXI. 


THE REIGN OF LOUIS XVI. 


§ 1. The duties of feudalism had perished, while the rights and privileges 
remained; class jealousies; condition of the peasants. § 2. Character 
of Louis XVI.; Maurepas; admission of reformers to the ministry ; 
restoration of the Parliaments. § 3. Principles of Turgot; his 
reforms; opposition of the privileged classes; Turgot’s fall. § 4. 
Financial policy of Necker. § 5. American revolt; France joins the 
colonies ; alliance of France and Spain; the armed neutrality ; isolation 
and danger of England. § 6. Necker’s reforms excite hostility ; his 
resignation; reaction against administrative reform. § 7. Independ- 
ence of the United States; siege of Gibraltar; treaty of Versailles. 
§ 8. Financial straits of the French government; administration of 
Calonne; hostility to Marie Antoinette. § 9. Financial disclosures; 
Calonne’s plan; the Assembly of Notables; fall of Calonne; Lomenie 
de Brienne; quarrel with the Parliament of Paris; summons of the 
States-General and recall of Necker. 


§ 1. In France the external fabric of feudalism had been more com, 
pletely destroyed than in any other country of Europe. The old 
system, under which the nobles governed their own estates with 
more or less responsibility to the crown, had given way to a new cen- 
tralised administration which had been gradually perfected from 
the reign of Louis XI. to that of Louis XIV. Under the king the 
supreme control of domestic affairs was in the hands of the con- 
troller-general of finances, who was assisted by a central council 
and by the provincial intendants. ‘he States-General had been 
powerless since the 14th century, and had never been summoned ~ 
since 1614, so that their composition and procedure were known 
only to antiquarians. In five of the outlying provinces, the 
so-called pays d’état, there still lingered some traces of the local 
estates, but they had no real vitality or importance except in 
Languedoc and to some extent in Brittany. In the other provinces, 
the pays @élection, the intendants were absolute rulers. All sorts 
of officials existed, many of whom had paid large sums for their 
posts, but their functions had become nominal. ‘The parliaments, 
or courts of justice, had retained their independence longer than 
any other institutions, and at one time had threatened to impose 


22 


474 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. XXI. 


formidable checks upon the royal power. But this was due, not to 
any sympathy with popular liberty, but to the fact that the lawyers 
had formed themselves into a hereditary and privileged class, and 
when the old parliaments were suppressed by Maupeou the action 
was applauded by Voltaire and his followers. The last vestige of 
the medizeval system had thus been swept away from the path of 
the royal despotism. The nobles were still the most conspicuous 
persons in their districts, but they had ceased to govern. ‘The 
peasants, who had once been their serfs, had risen to be metayer 
tenants, or in many parts small proprietors. ‘The only career left 
open to a noble was in the civil or military service of the govern- 
ment. In Paris or with the army he might still acquire fame, on 
his own estates he was powerless. His rank prevented him from 
becoming one of the intendants, and they exercised the power that 
had once belonged to his ancestors, 

Yet it is usually said that the French Revolution destroyed 
feudalism, which had provoked it. This is untrue if we regard 
feudalism in its old and true sense as a system of government 
and society, ‘The essential merit of feudalism was the emphasis 
that it laid upon the duties as well as the rights of property. 
But as it decayed, as the duties were usurped by the monarchy, 
the rights were left behind to console the nobles for their impo- 
tence. Thus they were exempted from payment of the taille 
and other oppressive taxes, and in its origin the exemption had 
ample justification. The taille was imposed to provide for the 
maintenance of a military force; but the nobles were bound to 
serve at their own expense, and therefore were excused. Since 
then the obligation of military service had lapsed, but the right of 
exemption had been jealously retained. So they had lost the 
absolute mastery over their serfs, but had kept the rights which had 
been the symbol and outcome of that mastery.. Many of them had 
powers of jurisdiction, all had supreme rights of hunting and 
forestry. They could exact forced labour from the peasants, and 
could compel them to pay tolls and other dues, and to grind their 
corn at the lord’s mill. ‘These exactions would have been cheer- 
fully acquiesced in as long as the lords were real rulers and gave 
protection and judicial administration in return for them. But in 
the 18th century the vast majority of the nobles were absentees, 
who left the collection of their dues in the hands of extortionate 
bailiffs and squandered the proceeds in the capital. It was the 
absence of duties that made the continuance of the rights and 
privileges absurd, and it was this, even more than their oppressive 
character, that roused the bitter wrath of the peasants. It was 
not against the feudal system, but against the effete survival of 


A.D. 1774: THE OLD REGIME. 475 


parts of the system, that the Revolution directed its destructive 
energy. . . 

The clergy were also unpopular, not so much on account of the 
spread of irreligion in France, but because they had come to occupy 
the same anomalous position as the secular lords. The great 
churchmen were owners of immense wealth, which was wrung from 
the tillers of the soil and for which no adequate services were rendered. 
The lesser clergy, who worked in poverty and were excluded from 
all hope of promotion, shared in the misery and sympathised with 
the aspirations of the people. Among the third estate there was a 
similar division of interests. In the cities municipal independence 
had perished since the days of Richelieu, and the intcndant was as 
active and powerful within the walls as outside. But the old 
offices were still objects of ambition to the citizens; like all other 
posts, they had been put up to sale by the government, and had 
become the exclusive property of a bourgeois aristocracy, as 
haughty as it was powerless. The lesser citizens groaned under the 
tyranny of guilds and other associations, originally formed for the 
protection of trade, but which were now employed to maintain the 
selfish privileges of the wealthy class. No conception of common 
interests united the citizens with the peasants, who had far more 
real grievances to complain of. So heavy was the burden of taxes 
imposed upon them that all motives for economy or for the 
improvement of agriculture were destroyed. The taille had been 
gradually increased by the mere will of the government, and its 
collection was purely arbitrary. Most of the indirect taxes were 
levied on necessaries, such as salt, and therefore fell with special 
weight on the poorer population. In addition to the odious exac- 
tions of their lords, the crown had now come forward with similar 
demands. No grievance is more prominent at this period than the 
corvées, the compulsory labour enforced by the central government 
for the making and repairing of roads. And besides having to bear 
most of the expenses of the regular forces, the peasants were also 
compelled to undergo an irksome term of service in the militia. 
Their case was unquestionably the hardest, but the revolt was 
commenced by the classes above them. The want of union 
between classes in France had long been the great safeguard of the 
monarchy ; it ruined the Revolution. After one moment ot 
combination against the crown, men turned against each other to 
vent a spite that had been ripening for generations. 

The monarchy had undertaken the difficult and dangerous task 
of discharging all the functions of government, and it can hardly be 
said to have succeeded. For a moment, under Louis XIV. and 
Colbert, there had seemed to be a fair prospect of the welfare of the 


476 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. XxI. 


country being firmly established. But the dream had suon dis- 
appeared. Louis XIV. himself had brought the nation to the verge 
of ruin, the Regent and Louis XV. had done nothing to save it. 
The finances are the crucial test of an administration. We have 
already seen how Law’s measures had resulted in bankruptcy, and 
his numerous successors had found it impossible to revive the 
national credit. The great problem was to make the revenue cover 
the expenditure, and this it never did; the continual deficit had 
burdened the country with an ever-increasing debt. It was now 
to be seen whether the new king could cope with difficulties 
which his predecessors had never fairly endeavoured to face. 

§ 2. Louis XVI. was born in 1754, and was therefore twenty years 
old at the time of his accession. Both in his merits and in his 
defects he presents a marked contrast to the other members of 
the house of Bourbon. He had been brought up in retirement, and 
his manners were alivays coarse and unprepossessing. He had no 
pronounced tastes except for the manual labour of an artisan and 
for hunting. But he was free from the gross vices that had 
disgraced his predecessors, and he was conscientiously eager to 
secure the welfare of his subjects. Unfortunately he had none 
of the requisite qualities for the discharge of this necessary task. 
Unable to form an opinion for himself, he lacked the strength 
of mind to carry out with resolution a course of action which 
he adopted on the advicé of others. Throughout his life he 
was dependent upon the influence of those around him, of his 
aunts, his brothers, and finally of his wife, Marie Antoinette, 
whom he had married in 1770, but who only gradually obtained 
that supremacy over his intellect and affections which was ulti- 
mately to prove fatal to both of them. The first great question 
that the king had to decide was the selection of a minister. Public 
expectation pointed to Choiseu!, who had been mainly instrumental 
in effecting the king’s marriage and in cementing the Austrian 
alliance. But at this time Marie Antoinette was comparatively 
powerless, and Louis was prejudiced against Choiseul as the 
opponent of his father. He decided to summon M. de Machault, 
but at the last moment his aunt, Madame Adelaide, interfered, and 
the letter which had been written to Machault was sent to M. de 
Maurepas. Maurepas had held office under Louis XV., but he had 
for many years been removed from public life, and his character and 
administrative powers had deteriorated during the interval. Instead 
of attempting to cope resolutely with the difficulties of France, he 
thought only of finding expedients to evade them and of securing 
his own tenure of office. He encouraged the king in his unwilling- 
ness to form a resolution for himself, and in his inclination to trust 


A.D. 1774. TURGOT. AT7 


to half-measures. No single man is more responsible for the great 
convulsion that closed the reign. But Maurepas’s first acts seemed 
hardly to deserve this condemnation. Careless about reforms 
himself, he was not unwilling to see’ them attempted by others, 
provided that his own authority was not shaken. 'The members of 
the triumvirate, Maupeou, Terrai, and d’Aiguillon, were dismissed 
amidst demonstrations of popular scorn and hatred. The ministry 
of foreign affairs was entrusted to M. de Vergennes, a distinguished 
diplomatist, who played little part in domestic affairs. The control 
of the finances was given to Turgot, the ablest and most virtuous of 
French administrators, and the management of the household to 
Malesherbes, one of the most amiable and blameless of the partisans 
of progress. 

The most pressing question for the new government to settle was 
that of the restoration of the ancient parliaments. As Maupeou 
had fallen, it was generally expected that the institutions which he 
had created would share his fate. ‘The people, who had forgotten 
everything but the fact that the parliaments had opposed the crown, 
clamoured for their revival. Turgot was resolutely opposed to the 
step. He disliked the claim of judicial bodies to interfere with 
legislative business, and he knew well that the parliaments were 
eager only to secure their own interests, and that when those were 
safe they would oppose all further reforms. On this subject, Voltaire, 
Turgot, the economists, and all the leaders of advanced thought, 
found themselves allied with the clergy and the supporters of 
despotism. ‘The king himself hesitated to undo the work of his 
grandfather. Maurepas, on whose decision the question ultimately 
rested, allowed himself to be carried away by the desire of applause. 
The parliaments were restored on condition of their future good 
behaviour, a condition which they never attempted to observe. 
The measure was extremely popular, but it was really reactionary 
rather than progressive, and it proved to be a serious obstacle to the 
reforms which Turgot was prepared to introduce. yey 

§ 3. Turgot, who had previously been Intendant of Limousin, c came 
into office with a ready-made scheme for the regeneration of France. 
The essence of his scheme was the restoration of the local self- 
government which the monarchy had first degraded and then 
destroyed. Hach village was to be administered by an elective 
municipality, and the municipal government in the towns was to 
recover its old efficacy. These local bodies were to send deputies to 
a larger municipality of the district or arrondissement, and these 
again to the municipality of the province. Above all was to be a 
grand municipality of the nation, in which the ministers were to 
have seats, and which was to exercise the ultimate voice in 


478 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. XXI, 


administrative matters. 'Thus would be formed a grand network of 
representative institutions, each aiding and strengthening the other. 
It did not enter into Turgot’s designs to entrust legislative power to 
the grand municipality so as to make it a new States-General. He 
was no enthusiast for mixed governments, but preferred the 
simplicity of absolute power. If he had had to create a state, he 
might probably have preferred a republic. But he was the minister 
of a king, and-he was not anxious to diminish the despotic power of 
the monarchy on which he relied to put down opposition to his 
reforms. His first experience in office, however, convinced him 
that the time was not ripe for such a sweeping change as he medi- 
tated, and he put his scheme on one side till he could effect more 
immediately pressing reforms. The net revenue amounted to 213 
millions, the expenditure to 235 millions, so that the deficit was 21 
millions a year. Turgot was determined to raise no more loans 
except when he could borrow money cheaply to pay off debts con- 
tracted at exorbitant interest. Neither would he impose fresh 
taxes. To meet the deficit he resorted to the strictest economy, and 
with such success that after a ministry of a year anda half he left 
the government in possession of a surplus of eleven millions. This 
economy was extremely displeasing to the courtiers, who were 
accustomed to make their living out of the extravagance of the 
government, and their discontent was heightened by subsequent 
measures. 

Turgot was a disciple of Quesnai, the founder of the school of 
economists known as the physiocrates. ‘Their fundamental theory 
was that the land was the sole source of wealth, and that taxes 
should be levied directly on the produce of the land. From the 
gross produce were to be deducted the expenses of cultivation and 
improvement, the subsistence and due remuneration of the labourer. 
This would leave a net revenue of which the state was joint 
proprietor with the individual landlord. The share which the state 
should demand was to be fixed by reason and evidence. Manufac- 
tures and commerce are not productive of wealth, but agents of dis- 
tribution ; they should therefore be freed from all the duties and 
restrictions that had been imposed upon them for generations. 
Turgot’s first measure was to issue an edict establishing perfect 
freedom of trade in corn within the kingdom; liberty of exportation 
was postponed. Mutilated as it was, the edict roused a storm of 
opposition which found an able leader in Necker, whose economical 
principles were opposed to those of Quesnai and Turgot. All the 
privileged classes joined in the outcry, the nobles, who foresaw the 
probable abolition of their exemptions, and the clergy, who were 
dismayed at the sight of a philosopher and a friend of Voltaire in the 


A.D. 1774-1776. TURGOT. 479 


ministry. A bad harvest and scarcity of bread gave additional 
weight to their representations. Riots took place in Paris, and there 
can be no doubt that this first recourse to revolutionary violence 
was instigated by some of the nobles. Louis XVI., always weak, 
was inclined to yield, and it was with great difficulty that Turgot 
induced him to stand firm and to put down disorder. | For the 
moment the minister seemed more powerful than ever, and the 
king declared that no one loved the people except himself and 
Turgot. 

The opposition steadily increased in strength. The clergy were 
seriously frightened by the obvious inclination of the ministers to 
a tolerant policy, and by the report that Malesherbes wished to 
restore the Edict of Nantes. A league was formed among the 
privileged classes, nobles, clergy and lawyers, to protect their vested 
interests. It was joined by the queen and most of the royal 
princes, and it had even the indirect support of Maurepas, who 
began to tremble lest the man he had raised to office should 
supplant him in his master’s favour. Meanwhile Turgot was con- 
tinuing his work without any heed to the approaching storm. In 
January, 1776, he proposed to the kiag in council a series of 
measures which sufficiently illustrate the scope and objects of his 
policy. The corvée for the making of roads was to be abolished and 
the expenses defrayed by a tax upon land: all the old taxes upon 
corn which hindered free trade within the kingdom were to be 
abandoned: the guilds and other protective associations were to be 
done away with, sothat every man might exercise his natural right 
to undertake what labour he chose: the gabelle, or tax upon salt, 
was to be altered so as to remedy the glaring inequality of its 
incidence: the expense of the king’s civil household was to be 
diminished, and the marriages of Protestants were to be legalised. 
Maurepas put up one of his creatures, Miromesnil, to oppose these 
measures, but Turgot carried the king with him, and the edicts were 
signed aud sent to the Parliament of Paris for registration. The 
Parliament justified all the fears which Turgot had expressed at 
the time of its restoration, and made itself the champion of the 
threatened privileges. To put down this resolute opposition the 
king had to hold a lt de justice, which, as Voltaire put it, was for 
once a lit de bienfaisance. But here Louis X VI.’s firmness suddenly 
came toan end. The members of his family urged upon him that he 
was going too far, and that he was degrading the monarchy by 
unworthy concessions to the rotwrier class. Maurepas was con- 
vinced that either he or the reformers must fall. By adroitly 
picking a quarrel with Malesherbes he forced him into a hasty 
resignation. ‘Turget being more obstinate and less sensitive, other 


480 “MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. Xxt. 


means had to be found. A paper was forged in imitation of his 
handwriting which contained reflections upon the king and queen, 
and this was brought to Louis. Forgetting all the services that had 
been rendered, the king was induced in a fit of pique to dismiss the 
only man who might have saved his crown and his life. Turgot 
‘went into retirement and died in 1781. 

§ 4. Maurepas was determined not to run the risk of being over- 
shadowed by another man of genius, and he appointed as Turgot’s 
successor M. de Clugny, an obscure Intendant of Bordeaux. The 
change was followed by an immediate collapse of credit. The 
Dutch promptly refused to supply a loan which had been arranged 
at four per cent. ‘To raise money the government was compelled 
to resort to the disgraceful expedient of a royal lottery. Most of 
the recently abclished abuses, including the corvées and the trade 
guilds, were restored. But the outcry against these measures was 
so general, that Maurepas, always trembling for his position, was 
planning to dismiss Clugny, when the latter saved him the trouble 
by his death (Oct. 1776). Another nonentity, Taboureau des 
Réaux, was appointed to the office of controller-general, but the real 
management of the finances was entrusted to Necker, a banker from 
Geneva, who had made a large fortune in business and who had 
gained a reputation as an economist by his opposition to 'Turgot 
about the corn trade. Necker was a foreigner and a Protestant, 
and Maurepas, afraid to appoint him to high office, gave him the 
novel title of ‘director of the royal treasure.” Even in the next 
year, when the controller-general resigned his shadowy functions, 
Necker retained a subordinate title and was excluded from the 
council. But it may serve to illustrate the importance of the 
financial administration that the ministry became, in the eyes 
both of contemporaries and historians, the ministry of Necker. 

Necker was not a great statesman, but he was for his time a 
considerable financier. In opposition to the physiocrats he returned 
to the economic principles of Colbert. At the same time he shared 
that belief in the power of credit which had been carried to favatical 
extremes by Law, and he considered that commerce and manutac- 
tures might be encouraged by an artificial increase of the currency. 
But his business habits saved him from carrying these ideas too 
far, while they enabled him to introduce unaccustomed order and 
method into the administration. He was extremely desirous to 
make the revenue cover the expenditure, and he was as willing as 
Turgot to diminish the latter by rigid economy. He looked to the 
taxes for supplies in ordinary times, while for exceptional demands 
he sought to raise loans at a moderate interest. In this his own 
reputation as a banker served him in good stead, and he obtained 


A.D. 1776-1777. NECKER. ; 481 


money much more easily and cheaply than his predecessors had 
been able to do. In one way his administration had important 
results for France. Like Rousseau, he was a native of Geneva, and 
he imported into monarchical France the ideas and traditions ofa free 
republic. These traditions and the exigencies of credit led him to 
introduce publicity into the national accounts, and thus to put an 
end to that secrecy which had been the snare and the security of a 
decrepit government. He was also willing to obtain the popular 
consent to taxation, by giving new life and powers to the provincial 
assemblies. Thus he did much to prepare the way for the Revolu- 
tion. His taxation led to the States-General, his loans gave the 
people convincing insight into the condition of the finances. For a 
time Necker was exceedingly popular. While the court regarded 
him as their only saviour, the salon of his wife gave him a recog- 
nised position among the friends of progress and enlightenment. 
But his economy soon disgusted his powerful patrons, while the 
retrograde character of many of his measures forfeited the confi- 
dence of the party of progress. In a time of peace his system 
might have secured to France a period of comparative tranquillity ; 
but, unfortunately for his reputation, he was compelled to raise 
exceptional supplies for an.expensive war. 

§ 5. The American colonies were now in open revolt against Eng- 
land. Their discontent had been first roused by the natural attempt 
of England to impose upon the colonists some share of the expenses 
occurred in the Seven Years’ War. Since then concessions had been 
made and withdrawn, with the result of increased bitterness on both _ 
sides, until the war finally broke out in 1775. On the 4th of June, ”? 
1776, the Americans issued their famous declaration of independence * 
which enunciated the rights of man. From the first the greatest 
enthusiasm had been felt in France for the cause of the colonists. 
Lafayette and other volunteers crossed the Atlantic to serve in the 
American armies. Vergennes, who inherited the desire of Chic iseul 
to avenge upon England the disasters of the last war, gave s.cret 
but invaluable assistance to the rebels. Still, the king and most of 
the ministers were averse to a war. ‘Turgot resolutely opposed it, 
and on this point Necker was at one with his predecessor. But 
the force of popular opinion proved too strong for the adherents of 
peace. The most reactionary nation can sympathise with a revolt 
against a hostile power, while they regard with horror any opposition 
to their own rule. Franklin became the idol of Paris when he 
visited France in 1777, aud the news of Burgoyne’s capitulation at 
Saratoga roused the excitement of the war party to fever heat. 
The success of the colonists seemed assured, and the friends of 
progress were as ready to worship success in the eighteenth as in 

22% 


a 


482 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. Xxt. 


the fifteenth century. Maurepas had no principles to conflict with 
his love of popularity, and the scruples of the king and the other 
ministers had to give way. On the 6th of February, 1778, two 
treaties were signed between France and the United States. The 
first stipulated only for friendship and commercial relations; by the 
second it was arranged that if England took aggressive measures 
against France, the two powers should combine for defensive and 
offensive purposes. France promised to make no attempt to recover 
those possessions in North America which had been recently lost, 
and neither party was to lay down arms until England had 
acknowledged the independence of the colonies. The news of this 
treaty made a profound impression in England. Lord North’s’ 
courage gave way, and he proposed to open negotiations with 
America. But Lord Chatham came down to protest in his dying 
speech against such a humiliation before an ancient enemy, His 
last act was to insist upon a war which he alone could have suc- 
cessfully directed. The English ambassador was recalled from 
Versailles, and naval hostilities were immediately commenced. 
From a purely military point of view, the action of France was 
well judged. England had been unable to put down the rebels 
when they were isolated, she was still less likely to succeed now that 
they were supported by the whole power of France. But a regard 
to internal politics amply justified the gloomy anticipations of 
Turgot and Necker. Peace was absolutely necessary tc restore 
financial prosperity to France. War involved increased expenditure 
and ultimate exhaustion. And there were still more convincing 


_arguments which ought to have weighed with the supporters of the 


monarchy. Rebellion is contagious, and it was preposterous. to 
expect that principles which were approved on the other side of the 
Atlantic could be excluded from European soil. The open inter- 
vention of France in the cause of republican liberty gave an 
enormous impulse to those forces which were gathering to effect 
the overthrow of the established system of government. But fora 
time all these considerations were forgotten in the passionate desire 
for revenge, and in the intoxication of unwonted successes. Not only 
did the French admirals, like d’Estaing and d’Orvilliers, show them- 
selves a fair match for Howe and Keppel, but all Europe seemed 
eager to join France against a haughty and dictatorial power. It 
was to Spain that Vergennes naturally made his first application 
for assistance. Charles III., as we have seen, was a firm believer in 
the rights of monarchs, and had no sympathy with the cause of 
rebels. But the traditional jealousy of England, the Family Com- 
pact, and above all the desire of recovering Gibraltar and Minorca, 
combined to overcome his scruples, and in 1779 a treaty was 


A.D. 1778-1780. WAR WITH ENGLAND. 483 


concluded between France and Spain against England. Spanish 
forces at once laid vigorous siege to Gibraltar, and England naturally 
reverted to her old and successful plan of involving France in a 
continental war. For this a convenient opportunity seemed to be 
offered by the outbreak of the quarrel about the Bavarian succession. 
But the caution of Vergennes averted this danger. Louis XVI. 
refused to assist his brother-in-law, and French mediation forced 
upon Joseph II. the peace of Teschen. This was followed by a 
general expression of resentment against the arrogant claim of 
England tonaval supremacy. Of this supremacy the most offensive 
symbol was the right of search, by which vessels sailing under a 
neutral flag were boarded to discover whether they were carrying 
supplies to the hostile belligerents, and if such goods were found 
they were confiscated. In 1780 Catharine II. of Russia issued a 
declaration, which involved an important and permanent change in 
international law, to the effect that neutral vessels may trade freely 
with belligerents in all articles that are not contraband, and that a 
blockade need not be respected unless it is effectual, i.e. that 
a mere formal announcement that a harbour is blockaded is 
insufficient unless enough ships are provided to prevent the ingress 
of other vessels. This declaration was accepted by Frederick the 
Great, who gladly seized the opportunity of displaying enmity to 
England and to the ministry of Lord North, and by most of the 
states of Northern Europe. Thus was formed the ‘armed 
neutrality,” which was a serious check upon English operations, 
although it did not lead to active hostilities. It was of great 
importance to England under these circumstances to retain the 
alliance of its old naval rival, Hoiland. 'The House of Orange had 
been closely attached to England ever since the recovery of the 
stadtholdership by William 1V. in 1748 and his marriage to a 
daughter of George II. The present head of the family, William V., 
whose minority had ended in 1766, was inclined to continue 
the same policy. But the republican party, which had its head- 
quarters in Amsterdam, was now very strong, and was eagerly 
desirous of an alliance with France and the United States as the 
best method of throwing off English dictation. In 1780 an 
American vessel was captured by the English, on which papers 
were found which proved that as early as 1778 the Pensionary of 
Amsterdam had drawn up a projected treaty with the American 
colonies, It was also known that Holland had sent supplies to the 
rebels, and that the Dutch island of St. Eustatius had been a great 
centre for traffic with America. So great was the indignation 
roused in London by these disclosures, that the envoy was with- 
drawn from the Hague, in December, 1780, war was declared against 


484 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. xxi. 


Holland, and thus England was left without an ally in Europe. 
To make matters worse, a great war had broken out in India in this 
year through the quarrel with Hyder Ali, and a French fleet under 
the Bailli de Sufiren gave the English forces ample occupation. At 
the same time the ministry was hampered by the Gordon riots, 
which arose from their concessions to the Roman Catholics, and by 
the dangerous condition of affairs in Jreland, where the volunteers 
had assumed the functions of government, and events were rapidly 
hurrying on to the legislative separation of the two islands in 1782. 

§ 6. It is obvious that these circumstances gave France very 
considerable advantages in the war, and thus enabled her to avenge 
in some measure the previous humiliations. But there was another 
side to the picture, in the enormous expenditure which these 
various and distant operations entailed upon the government. 
Necker succeeded for some time in raising supplies by loans 
without increasing the taxes. ‘To do this he had to persevere iu 
his plan of cutting down the expenses of administration. He 
reduced the number of receivers-general from forty-eight to 
twelve, and the twenty-seven treasurers of the army and navy to 
two, whom he made absolutely dependent upon the minister of 
finance. He also suppressed more than 500 offices in the royal 
household. While some of his measures, such as the prohibition 
to export looms and other manufacturing implements, savour of 
the protective system of Colbert, others seemed to be borrowed 
from the principles laid down by ‘Turgot. An edict of 1779 
enumerated the evils to commerce caused by the heavy tolls upon 
roads and navigable rivers, and ordered the proprietors of these 
rights to report them to the council with a view to their purchase. 
Another edict in 1780 made the first step in the direction of a great 
reform, the abolition of the system of farming the taxes so as to 
bring them directly into the exchequer. A month later it was 
announced that the taille and other direct taxes should not be 
increased in the future, except by laws registered in the superior 
courts. In July of the same year a provincial assembly was 
created for the province of Berry, which was to consist of twelve 
nobles, twelve ecclesiastics, and twenty-four members of the third 
estate. It was to meet for at least a month every two years, votes 
were to be taken not by estates but by heads, and it was to appoint 
an administrative committee to supervise affairs during the in- 
tervals between its sessions. Necker’s idea was to apply this system 
gradually to all the provinces of France, and to transfer the 
functions of the intendants and stb-delegates to these representative 
assemblies, 

This apparent conversion of Necker to the ideas of the reformers 


A.D. 17801781. FALL OF NECKER. 485 


roused great indignation among the official classes, who became as 
hostile to him as they had previously been to Turgot. At present 
he had the complete approval of the king, and could afford to 
disregard the efforts of the opposition. But towards the end of 
1780 he began to find increased difficulty in obtaining loans. To 
restore credit he obtained from Louis XVI. permission to publish 
the accounts, and in January, 1781, he issued his famous compte 
rendu. By this he made out that the receipts exceeded the 
expenditure by eighteen millions. It was really a partial and 
inaccurate statement, but it succeeded in restoring the confidence of 
the moneyed classes, and for a time money was easily obtainable. 
But the effects of the measure were far greater than this. The 
secrets of the administration were all at once laid bare to hostile 
criticsim, aud opponents of the government had now acknowicdged 
facts to point to in support of their denunciations. The outery 
among the privileged classes was very loud against a minister who 
had struck such a blow to the interests of the monarchy. The 
league against Necker was not so general as that against 'l'urgot: 
especially, it did not include the queen, who was now a power in 
France. But Maurepas was eager to get rid of his too pushing 
subordinate, and he was supported by Vergennes. An open 
quarrel broke out in the ministry, and Necker boldly brought 
matters to a crisis by demanding a seat in the council. Maurepas 
replied that he should be admitted when he abjured the Protestant 
religion, and Necker, in spite of the urgent solicitations of the 
queen, resigned his office in May, 1781. 

With the fall of Necker terminates the period of administrative 
reform in France. The reactionary party had succeeded in foiling 
the plans of those men who stood between themselves and ruin. 
Maurepas, on whom much of the responsibility rests, died before 
the end of the year. His nominal successor was Vergennes, but the 
latter was wholly unfitted to manage home affairs, and the post of 
chief minister was practically left vacant, except so far as it was 
filled by the queen. The finances were entrusted to Joly de 
Fleury, an incapable courtier, who increased the debt without 
providing any means for paying the interest. The reactionary 
character of the government is sufficiently illustrated by an edict of 
1781, which excluded from offices in the army all who could not 
prove four generations of nobility on their father’s side. Thus the 
army was made more exclusively aristocratic than it had ever been 
before, just at a time when the middle classes were beginning to be 
conscious of their power and their rights. 

§7. The first important event of this period was the conclusion of 
_ the English war. So far as it was waged for the independence of 


486 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. XXt, 


America, it was practically settled by the surrender of Cornwallis 
at Yorktown. (18 October, 1781), and by the fall of North’s 
ministry (March, 1782). .'lhe Whigs, who now came into office 
under Rockingham, were pledged by their previous attitude to grant 
the demands of the colonists. But both France and Spain had 
private objects of their own, and the peace had to be postponed 
until these had been settled. Hitherto the English had had very 
much the worst of the war. Many of the West Indian islands had 
been lost, and Minorca, which was then regarded as our most im- 
portant possession in the Mediterranean, had fallen to the Spaniards. 
Gibraltar was closely invested by land and sea, and its fall seemed 
imminent in spite of the heroic defence of General Elliott. 
Fortunately for England, the colonists were quite as alive to their 
own interests as were their allies. So long as they obtained their 
independence they cared nothing for the aggrandisement of Irance 
and Spain. After the fall of Yorktown they practically withdrew 
from the war, and, although they were bound not to conclude a 
separate treaty, they privately agreed with England as to the terms 
they were to receive. In 1782 the fortune of war turned. Rodney, 
by the novel manceuvre of breaking the line, won a great naval 
victory over De Grasse in the West Indies. Later in the year the 
English red-hot shot completely destroyed the floating batteries 
before Gibraltar, and the siege had to be raised after it had lasted 
for three years. ‘These disasters of the allies removed the chief 
difficulties in the way of peace, and the preliminaries were signed in 
January, 1783. England surrendered to France the small islands 
of St. Pierre and Miquelon in the St. Lawrence, Santa Lucia and 
Tabago in the Antilles, and Senegal and Goree in Africa. France 
undertook to withdraw assistance from Tippoo, who had succeeded 
his father, Hyder Ali. Spain obtained Minorca and Florida, but 
had to cede the Bahamas and to abandon the hope of recovering 
Gibraltar. Holland, so far from gaining anything by her breach 
with England, had to give up Negapatam, though her other colonies 
were restored to her. The independence of the United States was 
recognised, and their boundaries determined on the terms already 
arranged. The English claim that the loyal colonists should be 
compensated for their losses was abandoned. ‘The preliminaries 
were finally confirmed in the Treaty of Versailles (September, 1783). 

§8. Long before the conclusion of peace the glories of the war had 
been forgotten in comparison with the ever-increasing difficulties 
of the internal administration. Joly de Fleury had no method of 
raising money except by loans, and these he could not obtain so 
cheaply as Necker had done. To pay interest he had to impose 
new taxes. The Parliament of Paris, in its joy at the overthrow of 


A.D. 1781-1785. CALONNE. 487 


the late minister, accepted the edict, but the provincial parliaments 
were less submissive, and one of them, the parliament of Franche 
Comté, raised the first cry for the summons of the States-General. 
Fleury had to resign after adding three millions to the debt, and 
d’Ormesson, a young man, equally honest and incapable, was 
appointed in his place. D’Ormesson was led, by his innocent desire 
to get out of the difficulties, to postpone the payment of the public 
obligations, a measure which amounted to a practical acknowledg- 
ment of bankruptcy. After holding office for seven months he 
was dismissed, and the intrigues of the court ladies led to the 
nomination of Calonne as his successor. Calonne proved to be one 


of the most reckless and worthless ministers that were ever called © 


to direct the destinies of a great nation. His sole object was to 
disguise the real situation from the court, from the people, and 
even from himself. As much as he believed in anything he 
believed in the doctrine so hateful to political economists, that 
unproductive expenditure is a benefit to labour. This belief he 
carried to extremes as fatal as the ideas of Law, and equally 
delusive for a short time. While the deficit was constantly 
increasing, he spent money lavishly in public festivities, in useless 
works, and in gratifying the avarice of the princes and nobles. 
Even business men were dazzled by so astounding an exhibition of 
confidence, and for a time loans were readily obtainable. But so 
hollow a bubble must soon burst, and in 1786 Calonne found 
himself at the end of all his resources.. By this time public 
opinion had become more and more hostile against the court. The 
growing influence of the queen had excited ill-feeling, which was 
ageravated by scandalous rumours about her private conduct. The 
birth of a daughter in 1778, and of a son in 1781, after a long 
period of childlessness, had aroused bitter hostility in the house of 
Orleans, which had hitherto looked forward with confidence to the 
ultimate succession to the throne. All sorts cf reports were spread 
with malignant industry, and Marie Antoinctte’s actions, though 
not inconsistent with perfect innocence, were sufficiently injudicious 
to give some colour to the assertions of her enemies. In 1785 the 
trial and acquittal of the Cardinal de Rohan on the charge of 
stealing and purchasing a diamond necklace of the queen, and of 
having forged her signature in authority of the transaction, gave a 
fresh impulse to the current suspicions. It was while opinion was 
in this excited state that the truth about the financial condition 
was suddenly disclosed. 

§ 9. Since the fall of Turgot the revenue had been increased by 140 
millions, partly by the addition of new taxes, partly by the natural 
development of resources. In spite of this, during the three years 


a 


488 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. Xxi, 


of Calonne’s administration, years of perfect peace, the deficit had 
~ been increased by 35 millions. In August, 1786, Calonne confessed 
to the king exactly how matters stood, and at the same time 
proposed a plan for meeting difficulties, in which he borrowed most 
of the principles of Turgot and Necker, to which: his previous 
administration had been diametrically opposed. The whole king- 
dom was to be divided among provincial assemblies of three grades, 
one for the parish, one for the district, and one for the province ; 
and in their hands the assessment of all taxes was to be placed. A 
regular land-tax was to be imposed, from which no class, and not 
even the royal domain, was to be exempted. ‘T'rade in corn was to 
be free, except that the provincial assemblies might suspend expor- 
tation. Compulsory labour (corvées) was to be replaced by a poll 
tax, levied only on that class which had hitherto furnished thé 
labour. The tolls upon traffic between the various provinces were to 
be abolished and the gabed/e upon salt diminished, ‘These changes, 
according to Calonne’s calculation, would add 115 millions to the 
revenue within a single year. To carry such a sweeping measure, 
which involved a complete departure from the traditions of the old 
régime and attacked the foundation of all privileges, exceptional 
authority was needed, and the king was easily induced to summon 
an assembly of Notables for the beginning of 1787. Before they met 
the position of the government was altered for the worse by the 
death of Vergennes (13 February), who had considerable influence 
with the upper classes. 

It was a grand but chimerical idea to expect the privileged 
classes to sacrifice their private interests to save the state. ‘lhe 
assembly, which met on the 22nd of February, contained 144 
members, of whom only six or seven belonged to the third estate. 
It was soon evident that nothing but strenuous opposition was to 
be expected irom them. Even the people and the partisans of 
reform ridiculed measures which they would have welcomed from 
'Turgot, when they were offered by Calonne. In the assembly the 
opposition was headed by Lomenie de Brienne, archbishop of 
Toulouse, a selfish aspirant for office, and by Necker, who was 
disgusted at the exposure of the fallacious character of his own 
financial statement. ‘This formidable coalition convinced the king 
that ke must get rid of the unpopular minister, and Calonne was 
dismissed. But Louis refused to have anything to do with Necker, 
whose abrupt resignation he had never pardoned, and gave the 
vacant post to Brienne. Brienne had no policy of his own: he had 
posed as the champion of privileges to gain office, he adopted the 
plans of Calonne to keep it. The only difference was that he 
brought in the various measures singly, instead of trying to carry 


A.D. 1786-1788. THE STATES-GENERAL. 489 


them out at once. The Notables, satisfied with having overthrown 
the minister, approved his policy and were dissolved. But there 
still remained the Parliament of Paris, which had now become 
the last resource of the opponents of reform. ‘The edicts about the 
corvées, the trade in corn, and the provincial assemblies, were 
registered without opposition, but when the equal land-tax upon 
all classes was proposed, the Parliament refused to accept it. The 
edict was registered in a bed of justice, and for protesting against 
this high-handed measure the Parliament was exiled to Troyes. 
But Brienne soon found that he could not govern by himself, and 
the court was allowed to return to Paris on condition of accepting 
the edicts. Thus, by a curious mixture of violence and weakness, 
the crown gained its first victory over the privileged classes. But 
the quarrel broke out afresh on the next scheme for imposing a tax, 
and the Parliament determined to purchase the support of the 
people by denying its own rights in matters of taxation and by 
demanding the States-General. Another bed of justice, and the 
exile of the duke of Orleans and other leaders of the opposition, 
roused the Parliament to fury. It was quite in vain that Brienne 
sought to conciliate them by promising concessions to the Protes- 
tants and the summons of the States-General within five years. 
The arrest of two of the most violent members of the court only 
extorted fresh protests against the arbitrary conduct of the govern- 
ment and gave increased popularity to the Parliament. As a last 
resource Brienne determined to follow the example of Maupeou, 
to restrict the Parliament to its judicial functions, and to entrust its 
political duties to a wholly new court, or Cour Pléniére. But such 
general indignation was aroused that it proved impossible to carry 
out the measure. ILisings took place in Dauphiné, Brittany and 
otber provinces. Even an assembly of the clergy, which Brienne 
summoned in the hope of obtaining money, began its proceedings 
by demanding the abolition of the Cour Pléniére and the meeting 
of the States-General. At last the government gave way, and on 
the 8th of August, 1788, the States-General were summoned to 
meet in May, 1789. A fortnight later Brienne, whose adminis- 
tration had been one long failure, resigned, and the king, much 
against his will, was obliged to summon Necker once more to 
office. | 


490 MODERN EUROPE. 


CHAPTER XXII. 


THE FRENCH REVOLUTION. 


I. FALL OF THE Oxp RiGimE.—§ 1. Discord in the court and 
ministry; questions about the constitution of the States-General ; 
attitude of the third estate; the “national assembly.” § 2. The hall 
closed; the oath of the tennis-court; adhesion of the clergy; the 
royal sitting; victory of the assembly. § 3. The court determines to 
employ force; disturbances in Paris; the Palais Royal; government 
assumed by the electors. § 4. Dismissal of Necker; rising in Paris ; 
storming of the Bastille; the king yields; royal visit to Paris. § 5. 
Continued disturbances; Bailly and Lafayette; the electors superseded 
by a new municipality. § 6. Provincial risings; abolition of feudal 
privileges onthe 4th of August. II, Tut Constirution.—§ 7, Parties 
in the Constituent Assembly; Mirabeau. § 8. The rights of man; a 
single chamber; the suspensive veto. § 9. Officers’ banquet at 
Versailles; march of the women; riot in the palace; the king and 
royal family remove to Paris; all the assembly follows; secession of 
moderates. § 10. Comparative order; the Jacobin and other clubs. 
§ 11. New territorial divisions; judicial reforms, § 12. Financial 
difficulties; confiscation of ecclesiastical property; assignats; civil 
constitution of the clergy; new attack on the nobles. § 13, The 
right of peace and war; responsibility of the opposition, the king, and 
the ministers, for the progress of the revolution. § 14. Mirabeau’s 
relations with the court; his policy and his death, § 15. Flight and 
capture of Louis XVI.; conduct of the assembly; the monarchy 
suspended; the Feuillans. § 16. Completion of the constitution ; 
Robespierre’s self-denying ordinance; the king’s acceptance; the 
Assembly dissolved. HI, EURope AND THE REvVOLUTION.—§ 17. 
French encroachments in Avignon, Alsace, &c.; complaints of the 
German princes; the emgrés at Coblentz. § 18. Attitude of the 
European States; Leopold IJ. inclined to peace; declaration of Pilnitz. 
IV. THe LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY.—§ 19. Parties in the new assembly, 
Feuillans, Jacobins, and Girondists. § 20. Edicts against the emigrants 
and the non-juring priests; the royal veto. § 21, The Girondists 
eager for a war; three armies on the frontier; death of Leopold II. ; 
the Girondists in office; declaration of war, § 22. Failure of French 
troops; the king vetoes two more edicts; dismissal of Roland and his 
colleagues. § 23, Riot of the 20th of June; temporary reaction ; 
Lafayette in Paris. § 24. The foreign invasion revives hostility to 
the crown; manifesto of the duke of Brunswick; the Tuileries 
stormed on the 10th of August. § 25. Impotence of the assembly ; 
the monarchy suspended; Paris under the commune; the royal family 


A.D. 1789. THE STATES-GENERAL. 491 


in the Temple. § 26, The Prussians advance to Verdun; Lafayette a 
prisoner; the September massacres. § 27. Dumouriez saves France ; 
the cannonade of Valmy ; end of the monarchy. 


J. Fatt or THE Ox_p Ritaime, 5T1 or May to 4TH oF 
Aveust, 1789. 


§ 1. THe recall of Necker and the definite summons of the States- 
General excited universal enthusiasm throughout France. But 
the two measures were not steps in exactly the same direction. 
Necker was by no means in complete sympathy with the reforming 
party, with which he had allied himself to put pressure on the court. 
Narrow-minded and unsympathetic, he thought only of administra- 
tive reform, the security of credit, and his own tenure of office, and 
had no conception of the needs and desires of a people amongst 
whom he was always a foreigner. Neither was he in accord with 
the court, where the chief influence was exercised by the queen, the 
count of Artois, and the Polignac faction, who were opposed to 
all constitutional change beyond what was necessary to evade 
immediate danger. The differences between Necker and the court 
divided the ministry, which was therefore without any decided 
policy. The king, who ought to have taken a line of his own,.was 
incapable of independent action, and vacillated helplessly between 
one party and another. It was this condition of the government 
which was the great advantage of the reformers and which gave 
rise to many of the disasters that were to fall upon France. 

The States-General having been summoned, it was necessary to 
determine their constitution, a matter of some difficulty, as they had 
never met since 1614. ‘There were two great questions to settle: 
(1) Were the three orders to have an equal number of representa- 
tives, or was the third estate to be the more numerous, as several 
precedents indicated ? and (2) Were the three orders to deliberate 
separately or together, i.e. were votes to be taken by head or by 
order? These questions ought to have been decided by the 
executive government, but there was too little unanimity for this. 
Ultimately the matter seems to have been arranged by Necker, and 
his decision offers an excellent illustration of the position in which 
he stood. ‘Tobe popular was essential for him, therefore he granted 
the third estate a number of representatives equal to the other two 
orders together. ‘To restore the finances the pecuniary privileges of 
the upper classes must be abolished, and to effect this it seemed 
desirable that the assembly should be undivided. On the other 
hand, that measure would make the third estate absolute and 
would involve danger to the constitution. Unable to decide 
between these conflicting considerations, the minister left the 


492 MODERN EUROPE. — CHAP. XXII. 


question of voting undetermined. All citizens over twenty-five 
years of age who paid the capitation-tax were authorised to choose 
representatives; and these representatives, the electors as they were 
called, chose the deputies for their respective estates, and drew up 
the cahiers, or lists of grievances and instructions to tle deputies. 
These cahiers, which touch upon nearly every department of 
government and of social organisation, offer the most instructive 
picture of ancient France, and throw a flood of light upon the aims 
and wishes of its various classes. 
On the 5th of May the assembly was opened by colourless 
speeches on the part of the king, Necker and other ministers. 
The total number of deputies amounted to 1139, of whom 291 
represented the clergy, 270 the nobles, and 578 the third estate. 
The different classes had mainly. chosen their own members, but 
the nobles included twenty-eight members of the parliament, 
whose rank was official, while the commons had chosen twelve 
nobles, including Mirabeau, and two ecclesiastics, of whom one was 
the Abbé Sieyés. From the first the third estate assumed a 
resolute attitude on the qnestion of procedure, demanded that 
votes should be taken by head, and refused to verify the powers of 
its deputies, until the assembly had been constituted by the 
adhesion of the other orders. Among the nobles there were a 
number of moderate reformers, of whom the most prominent were 
Lafayette, Lally-Tollendal, and Clermont-Tonnerre, who urged 
this course of action upon their colleagues. But the majority, 
influenced by the queen and the count of Artois, refused to give up 
their separate existence, and maintained that deliberation by order 
and the right of each estate to a veto were essential parts of the 
constitution. The clergy were more evenly divided. Most of the 
great ecclesiastics were inclined to support the nobles, and to oppose 
a union of the three orders which would leave them powerless to 
defend their interests or their religion. But the majority of the 
order was composed of ill-paid ewrés, who had little sympathy with 
their haughty and high-born superiors, and were inclined to throw 
‘in their lot with the third estate. On the motion of the clergy 
commissioners were appointed to devise some compromise, but the 
attempt failed. Nothing could be more adroit than the tactics of 
the commons, who succeeded in throwing all the blame of their 
prolonged inactivity upon the other estates. At last it was decided 
to act with decision. On the 12th of June they invited the clergy 
and nobles to join them in a common verification of powers, and at 
once proceeded with that necessary preliminary of business. A few 
curés appeared among them, and on the 17th they took the all- 
important step of assuming the name of national assembly, thus 


A.D. 1789. THE NATIONAL ASSEMBLY. 493 


ignoring the separate existence of the rival estates. This daring 
measure was followed by others equally bold and prudent. They 
declared that ail the existing taxes were illegal, because they 
had not been granted by representatives, and then proceeded to 
authorise their continuance during the session of the assembly. 
This provided them with a valid security against an attempted 
dissolution. They then guaranteed the public debt, and appointed 
a committee to consider the food question and to concert measures 
for averting a threatened famine. Late on the 19th of June the 
clergy, by 188 votes to 129, decided to join the third estate. The 
majority was mainly composed of the lower clergy, but it con- 
tained several bishops, and was headed by the archbishop of 
Bordeaux. 7 

§ 2. The government was astounded at the rapidity with which 
events had marched. Necker was as irritated as the most 
pronounced supporter of despotism and privilege. The establish- 
ment of a single legislative assembly, in which the commons were 
practically supreme, was fatal to his favourite scheme of a double 
chamber like the English parliament. He advised the king to hold 
a royal sitting, much the same thing as a lit de justice, to 
conciliate the people by granting the most essential reforms, and to 
order the separate deliberation of the three estates on all matters 
concerning the interests of classes. This was a measure which 
might have succeeded earlier, but was now much too late, and 
moreover was not exactly carried out. The court party succeeded 
in gaining the king’s ear, and convinced him that the interests, not 
only of the crown, but of religion, wereat stake. It was determined 
to effect a real cowp d’état and to strike terror into the hearts of 
the opposition. But in the meanwhile it was important to prevent 
any further sessions, for fear lest the union of the clergy with the 
third estate might make their subsequent separation more difficult. 
On the pretext that the hall had to be prepared for the royal sitting 
it was occupied by workmen, and when Bailly, the president, 
arrived in the morning he was informed that no session could be 
held. The assembly was roused to indignation by so palpable a 
trick, and, after some violent proposals had been rejected, they 
adjourned to the adjacent tennis-court. There, on the motion of 
Mounier, a deputy of Dauphiné, and one of the most moderate of 
the reformers, all with one exception took a solemn oath ‘‘not to 
desert the assembly and to meet wherever circumstances shall 
require until the constitution is firmly established ona solid founda- 
tion.” The next day the count of Artois engaged the tennis-court, 
but the deputies found more respectable and comfortable quarters 
in the church of St. Louis. - Here they were immensely encouraged 


494 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. XXII. 


by the arrival of the majority of the clergy, who were welcomed 
with transports of joy (21 June). 

The court blindly adhered to the programme that had been 
agreed upon. On the 23rd of June Louis XVI. entered the 
assembly with all the impressive pomp of the old régime. Necker 
showed his disapprobation of the changes made in his scheme, and 
revived his waning popularity, by absenting himself. The king, 
who had learnt his lesson only too well from his advisers, proceeded 
to rate the assembly in terms which were equally opposed to 
prudence and to his own acquiescent temper. He declared that 
the national representatives could only be composed of the three 
estates deliberating apart; only on special occasions and with 
royal permission could a joint meeting be held. He prohibited the 
discussion of all burning questions, such as the property and 
privileges of classes, and ordered the immediate consideration of 
certain specified reforms which he would accept without hesitation. 
‘The decrees of the 17th were declared to be unconstitutional and 
therefore annulled. Finally he ordered the immediate dissolution 
of the assembly, and the meeting in different chambers on the next 
day. ‘Ican say with truth that no king has ever done so much 
for any nation: support me in this benevolent undertaking, or else 
I willalone secure the welfare of my people and will regard myself as 
their only real representative.” ‘The clergy and nobles obeyed the 
order to separate at once, but the third estate remained in sombre 
silence until Mirabeau rose and inveighed in burning words 
against the insulting dictation they had listened to. On the 
arrival of the Grand Master of the Ceremonies to remind the 
deputies of their instructions the orator turned upon him fiercely 
and bade him tell his master that they were there by the will of 
the people, and would not depart unless compelled by bayonets. 
It was unanimously decided to maintain the edicts of the 17th, 
and to declare the inviolability of the national representatives. 

The coup d’état had already failed when those against whom it 
was directed had shown that they were not intimidated. Louis 
himself was the first to recognise a defeat which he had courted 
under the influence of others. The assembly by its firmness had 
ousted the king from the highest position in France, and the first 
great step in the revolution was taken, On the next day the 
majority of the clergy again joined the third estate, and their 
example was followed by 43 nobles, among whom was a prince of 
the royal blood, Philip of Orleans. On the 27th the king senta 
special request to the rest of the nobles and clergy that they would 
also join the national assembly. With unfeigned reluctance they 
obeyed the royal order, and henceforth sat among the men whose 


A.D. 1789. THE NATIONAL ASSEMBLY. 495 


measures they hated and dreaded. They were encouraged by 
representations from the court that their complaisance would not be 
permanent and that means would be found to defeat the hostile 
projects of the revolutionists. 

§ 3. The first alarm being over, the court party began to repent of 
the weakness they had shown in allowing the assembly to gain so 
easy a victory. ‘The king was carefully separated from Necker and 
other moderate advisers, so as to give free play to the influence of 
the queen and the count of Artois. The new scheme was to employ 
force to repress a movement which had become too dangerous to be 
despised or tolerated. [rom all parts of the kingdom troops were 
collected, and before long Paris was surrounded by 40,000 men. 
The supreme command was entrusted to Marshal Broglie, a veteran 
of the Seven Years’ War, who took his measures as if he had to 
conduct a regular campaign against a foreign enemy. Such public 
preparations naturally aroused the alarm of the assembly. On the 
motion of Mirabeau a deputation was sent to the king to express 
apprehension and to demand the withdrawal of the troops. Louis 
replied that he had supreme control of the army, that his only 
object was to ensure tranquillity, and that if the deputies were 
alarmed they might withdraw to Noyon or Soissons. Such an 
answer was equivalent to a confirmation of the worst fears, 

But already the initiative in resistance had been taken by a far 
more dangerous enemy than the assembly, the people of Paris. 
For a long time the capital had been in a very disturbed state, 
chiefly owing to the scarcity of food and the consequent riots for 
bread. But since the meeting of the States-General the disorders 
had become more organised and more political. It is difficult to 
decide how far this change was due to chance or to premeditation; 
There can be no doubt that a large number of contemporaries 
believed that the chief instigator of disturbances was the duke of 
Orleans, and that the leading rioters received pay from him, 
Orleans was the bitter and unscrupulous enemy of the queen, and 
had sufficient ground to complain of the treatment he had received 
from Louis. His personal character was base enough to make no 
charge against him incredible. On the other hand, he was too 
timid, too weak, and too wanting in talents, to be the leader even of 
a riot. But itis probable that he was really the instrument of abler 
men, who used his wealth and his name, and promoted disorder for 
their own ends. It is quite possible, though not so certain, that 
they wished to depose the king and to raise Orleans to the crown, or 
at any rate to theregency. The malice of his numerous enemies has 
included Mirabeau among these members of the Orleanist faction, 
but the calumny has been sufficiently refuted, But there is no 


496 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. XxIL 


doubt that he was fully aware of the designs of the revolutionists, 
and that he was equally willing to make use of them or to defeat 
them as circumstances dictated. 

The head-quarters of the disorderly element in Paris was in the 
cafés which had grown up round the garden of Orleans’ residence, 
the Palais Royal. There was formed a sort of club, which had no 
definite existence, but which used to meet to discuss affairs and 
which sent out emissaries to promote the course of action which 
it desired. It was their dictation which gave to the popular move- 
ments a consistency and definiteness of object which they must 
otherwise have lacked. O e of tho chief aims of their intrigues 
was to corrupt the soldiers, and in this they were conspicuously 
successful. The result of the agglomeration of troops in the capital 
was that those troops became untrustworthy and insubordinate. A 
colonel arrested some of his men for acting in the interests of the 
Palais Royal, the mob released them, and the regiment went over to 
the popular side. It became known that the native regiments would 
not act against the people, and Broglie had to resort to the still, 
more unpopular measure of summoning foreign troops to effect the 
designs of the court. The excitement in Paris steadily increased, 
and there was no adequate authority to put down the tumults. In 
this crisis the government of the city was assumed by the electors 
who had chosen the deputies for the States-General, and they ful- _ 
filled their self-imposed task with an energy and devotion that 
reflected the highest credit upon them. It was mainly due to their 
exertions that supplies were obtained and that the city was saved 
from the horrors of famine. 

§ 4. Meanwhile the court party adhered to their plan. On the 
11th of July Necker and three of his colleagues were summarily 
dismissed and banished, and their places filled by devoted 
royalists, Breteuil, Broglie, Foulon, and Laporte. ‘This was a 
tremendous blow to the assembly, which was now confronted by 
a united and avowedly hostile ministry. A deputation was sent 
to demand Necker’s recall and to renew the petition for the 
dismissal of the troops. An unsatisfactory answer from the king 
provoked edicts in favour of the fallen ministers, and the assembly 
decided to sit night and day to prevent a forcible closing of the hall. 
To relieve the president from the fatigue involved by this measure 
Lafayette was elected vice-president. But again it was evident 
that the real battle was to be fought in Paris and not at Versailles. 
The news of the dismissal of the ministers reached the Palais Royal 
on the 12th: at once Camille Desmoulins, the most eloquent of the 
popular orators, denounced the king’s action as the tocsin for a St. 
Bartholomew of the patriots, and called upon the people to rise in 


A.D. 1789. FALL OF THE BASTILLE. 497 


defence of their lives and liberties. The mob rose in obedience to 
this suggestion, and in the Tuileries gardens came into collision 
with a German regiment. Blood was shed in the skirmish, but the 
French guards joined the citizens and forced the Germans to retreat. 
It was feared that a general attack would be made upon the capital, 
and the troops and citizens remained on the defensive all night. 
The next day the mob repaired to the Hétel de Ville and demanded 
arms from the electors. Flesselles, the provost of the merchants 
and head of the old muncipality, put them off with promises 
and assurances that were never fulfilled. The greatest disorder 
prevailed, and the criminal classes took advantage of it to commit 
the worst outrages with impunity. To serve the double purpose of 
restoring tranquillity and defending the city, the electors determined 
to organise the citizens into a military force, and thus laid the 
foundation of the famous National Guard. All that was now 
wanted was arms, and they were obtained by an attack on the 
Invalides. The attention of the mob was now directed to the 
famous fortress of the Bastille, the most conspicuous monument of the 
old despotism, which commanded the Faubourg St. Antoine, whence 
the worst class of the rioters were furnished. After a siege of 
several hours the garrison compelled the commander, De Launay, to 
surrender on condition that the lives of the garrison should be spared. 
The leaders of the attack did what they could to observe their 
promise, but the mob was too infuriated to listen either to reason 
or to authority. De Launay with several of his subordinates was 
murdered, and the rest of the garrison, who were carried to the 
Hétel de Ville, were with difficulty saved by the electors. At- 
tention was now called to the failure of Flesselles to fulfil his 
promises of procuring arms, and a letter which had been found upon 
De Launay was considered to prove that he had all along been 
betraying the people until succour could arrive. Flesselles tried to 
brave the matter out and agreed to accompany his accusers to the 
Palais Royal, but on the way he was shot. ‘The mob was supreme 
in Paris, the troops which had been so assiduously collected were 
utterly untrustworthy, and the commander, Besenval, could do 
nothing but withdraw from the city. 

The very night which witnessed these events in Paris had beer 
destined by the court for their great coup d’état. The king was 
to renew his declaration of the 23rd of June, of which several 
thousand copies had been printed for circulation. The military 
force was to compel its acceptance by the assembly, which was 
then to be dissolved. To provide for immediate financial necessities, 
notes had been struck off for more than a hundred millions, The 
danger from the mob of Paris was ill understood, and despised by the 

23 


498 MODERN EUROPE. Cuap. xxl. 


ignorant and thoughtless courtiers. ‘The assembly was perfectly 
aware of these designs, and was sitting in momentary expectation 
of a crisis, when the news came of the disturbances at Paris. One 
deputation after another was sent to the king to demand the 
removal of the troops as the one method of securing tranquillity, but 
he refused to yield. At last it was announced that the Bastille ~ 
had fallen, and that De Launay and Flesselles had perished A 
third deputation was proposed, but Clermont-Tonnerre interfered 
with the words: ‘* No, let us leave them the night for reflection; 
kings, like other men, must pay for experience.” In the morning 
the question of a deputation was again discussed, when the news 
came that the king was on his. way to the assembly. He was 
received in profound silence until in a few spontaneous words he 
expressed his trust in the deputies and announced that he had 
ordered the troops to quit both Paris and Versailles. Enthusiastic 
applause welcomed these words, the assembly rose in a body and 
escorted the king to the palace amidst the cheers of the crowd: 
Louis followed up his tardy policy of concession by declaring his 
willingness to recall Necker, and by asking the assembly to act as 
mediator for him, both with the minister and with the citizens. A 
deputation of a hundred members was appointed to carry the 
welcome news to Paris, where they were received in triumph. 
Bailly, the first president of the National Assembly, was elected 
mayor of Paris, and Lafayette, who was hailed by his admirers as 
the champion of liberty in two hemispheres, was made commander 
of the newly formed National Guard. It was determined to 
signalise the restoration of peace by inducing the king to visit his 
capital. Louis, who lacked everything except courage and good- 
nature, undertook the journey in spite of the misgivings of his 
family, and the royal entry was made on the 17th of July with every 
external appearance of success. The promoters of the coup d'état 
were forced to acknowledge their defeat, and the most prominent of 
them, the count of Artois, the princes of Condé and Conti, and 
the Polignac family, evaded the popular fury by speedy flight to 
Turin, where they strove to restore their failing cause by foreign 
intervention. Necker returned from exile, and his journey through 
France resembled a triumphal procession. Never, either before or 
afterwards, did he enjoy such unlimited popularity, but he owed it 
rather to his sufferings than to his achievements, and another year 
of office lost him both the regard of the people and his reputation 
as a statesman. 

§ 5. The 14th of July was the second of the great days of the 
Revolution. The 23rd of June had given supreme legislative 
authority to the assembly ; the fall of the Bastille established the 


A.D. 1789. PARIS. 499 


sovereignty of the people. Such conspicuous and speedy successes 
seemed to justify the expectation that tranquillity would now be 
restored, but this was not the case. The disturbances in Paris 
continued. Foulon and his son-in-law Berthier, who were 
suspected of having helped to bring about the scarcity of corn, 
were brutally murdered in spite of the efforts of Lafayette to save 
them. It is almost certain that these and other outrages were 
concerted, and were not due to the spontaneous passions of the 
mob. It must be remembered that the Orleanist faction was still 
disappointed. They had hoped for the deposition if not for the 
death of the king, but Louis had been formally reconciled with the 
people. Their only chance lay in urging on the movement of 
revolution, in discrediting the new authorities and overthrowing the 
supremacy of the middle class, who were opposed by nature and 
interest to further employment of violence. Bailly and Lafayette, 
the representatives of this class, did all they could to restore order 
and confidence. ‘The latter organised the National Guard and gave 
them as their colours the famous tricolour, composed of the blue 
and red, the colours of Paris, and the white of the monarchy 
Bailly, a student of astronomy and mathematics, who had little 
experience of practical affairs, found his post an almost intolerable 
burden. The electors, just as they were beginning to cope 
successfully with the task they had undertaken, were dismissed 
with ingratitude, and replaced by 120 deputies, two from each 
district. The new administrators had the will but not the 
experience to rule, and showed scanty respect for the mayor whom 
popular acclamation and not their own choice had selected. And 
their own authority was not absolute. Everywhere the fatal 
doctrine was adopted, that representatives can only carry out the 
will of their constituents. This gave enormous advantages to the 
underground agitators. If acon:mittee opposed them, they appealed 
to the municipality, if that body was equally resolute they 
complained to the districts. verybody wished to govern, no one 
to obey. The great problem was still to supply the capital with 
food, and Bailly spent night and day at the deliberations of the 
committee of subsistence. The destruction of the barriers and 
the consequent cessation of the octrozv, or tax on provisions, left 
the city without funds, and the money which purchased corn for 
Paris, often at a ruinous loss, had to be furnished by the central 
government, Even in fulfilling this necessary duty the commiitee 
was hampered by the reckless conspirators. All sorts of expedients 
were employed to disgust the people with the bread that was 
supplied them, and the National Guard had to be employed in 
protecting the convoys of corn and the bakers’ shops, The duke 


500 - MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. XxI. 


of Orleans was even accused of buying up corn so as to increase the 
scarcity. Bailly’s Memoirs give a vivid picture of the anxieties and 
worries of each day that elapsed before the new harvest could be 
got in. 

§ 6. Meanwhile disorders had spread from the capital to the 
provinces. Everywhere the old authorities were replaced by new 
ones, and the sudden change of system destroyed all the repressive 
powers of government. In the north the lower classes suddenly 
refused to pay the accustomed services and dues, and thus deprived 
their superiors of the means of subsistence. In the southern 
provinces the peasants set themselves to take a terrible vengeance 
for the oppressions which they had endured for centuries. Auvergne, 
Dauphiné, and Franche-Comté were the scene of frightful atro- 
cities; castles were burnt, nobles and their families were tortured 
and killed, and all the horrors of the old Jacquerie were renewed 
with complete impunity. 

The intelligence of these events reached the National Assembly 
on the 4th of August, and roused the members from an academical 
discussion of the rights of man, which had been started by 
Lafayette. ‘The assembly was the only body which could restore 
order, but it was rightly felt that this must be preceded by a 
removal of grievances. ‘Iwo nobles, Noailles and d’Aiguillon, 
began the work of destruction by proposing the abolition of all 
feudal rights and of all exemptions and privileges enjoyed by 
individuals and corporations. ‘The proposals were received with 
acclamation, and the assembly promptly decreed that it “ annulled 
the feudal régime, abolished all privileges with regard to subsidies, 
and declared every citizen admissible to all offices and dignities, 
ecclesiastical, civil, and military.” A perfect frenzy of self-abne- 
gation seized the deputies, every one hastened to resign or abolish 
something, whether he possessed it or not. The sitting was pro- 
longed till midnight, while one decree after another was carried 
with reckless haste, Mad finally Louis XVI. was formally utr 
the “ restorer of French liberty.” 

The famous 4th of August, which was afterwards called the “ St. 
Bartholomew of property,” Heserevel the last relics of the feudal 
system in France and marks the final termination of the ancien 
régime. ‘The following is a brief summary of the decrees that were 
adopted by the assembly. Serfdom, corvées, and all the customary 
services that the lords had been accustomed to exact from their 
peasants were abolished: the exclusive rights of hunting and the 
savage punishments for poaching were done away with: the guilds 
and other close corporations in the towns were dissolved: offices 
were no longer to be sold, and the administration of justice was to 


A.D. 1789. THE FOURTH OF AUGUST. 501 


be gratuitous: the lords lost all their old rights of jurisdiction: 
tithes were to be redeemed and converted into a money-tax : the 
payment of annates to Rome and the plurality of benefices were 
forbidden. It is perfectly true that these changes were too 
sweeping and too important to be made all at once and with so 
little consideration ; it is true that the work of destruction ought 
not to have been accomplished until a new system was ready to 
replace the old; it is true that the deputies acted under the 
influence of an excitement that overpowered all considerations of 
statesmanship or even of justice. Nevertheless the work was 
essentially necessary, and there was something grand and im- 
pressive in the spirit of self-sacrifice that had been shown. The 
decrees of the 4th of August inflicted great temporary disasters 
upon France, but they have given great blessings to humanity. 
They vindicated for all time the freedom of labour and the equality 
of all men before the law. 


If. Tue Constirotion, 4Tn or Avaust, 1789, To 30TH OF 
SEPTEMBER, 1790. 


§ 7. The old system having perished, the monarchy having 
abdicated its powers to the assembly and the nation, the privileges 
which divided classes having been abolished, it was now impera- 
tively necessary to commence the great work of establishing a new 
constitution which should give permanence to the great changes 
that had been made. From the time the assembly began to 
grapple with real definite work, in which questions of principle 
were involved, parties began necessarily to form themselves in its 
midst. On the right sat the partisans of reaction, all members of 
the clergy and of the noble class, who wished not so much to 
prevent further change as to undo what had been already 
accomplished. Hitherto they had mostly maintained a_ con- 
temptuous silence, in the hope that the court would find some 
means of changing the course of affairs. Now that they began to 
take part in business they posed as the champions of prerogative and 
privilege, Buttheir conduct was still factious and reckless : not in- 
frequently they allied themselves with the extreme party in the hope 
of carrying measures which would bring the assembly into disrepute. 
Thir most prominent representatives were Maury, an ecclesiastic, 
Cazales, a noble and an officer, and d’Eprémesnil, the champion of 
the Parliament of Paris. But on the whole the party was not 
’ conspicuous either for ability, prudence, or patriotism, and it 
gradually lost ground as its numbers were decreased by the con- 
tinuous emigration. 


502 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. XxIt. 


In the centre sat the moderate party, .he allies of Necker, headed 
by honest and capable men such as Mounier, Malouet, Lally- 
Tollendal, and Clermont-Tonnerre. They had been disgusted by 
the popular excesses in Paris and elsewhere, they were eager to stop 
a movement which they could no longer hope to control, and they 
wished to direct all their efforts to the formation of a permanent 
and effective constitution. Their ideal was a system like that of 
England, the division of the legislative power between the king and 
two chambers, triennial elections, and the retention of executive power 
by the king and ministers whom he selects. There can be no 
doubt that the triumph of this party would have saved France 
from many of its subsequent disasters, but unfortunately it was too 
much bound up with Necker. Had he been the great statesman 
that his admirers deemed him, he might have directed the course 
of events and maintained both himself and the monarchy. But he 
was a mere financier, with no adequate conception of the great issues 
that were being raised, and with no ability to grapple with the 
great practical difficulties that stood in his way. ‘The failure of his 
administration involved the defeat of the party with which he was 
identified. 

The left was occupied by the great mass of the deputies who 
had no particular union, and who by no means shared the same 
opinions on all subjects. Generally they sympathised with the 
revolution, and they were united by a common antipathy to 
despotism and to class privileges, but they included the most 
opposite views as to where the movement was to end. On the 
extreme left sat a small and as yet unnoticed group of fanatics who 
already dreamed of a republic. Among them were Robespierre, 
Pétion, and Buzot; but no one could foretell their future prominence. 
The most extreme of the prominent leaders of the assembly were 
the heads of the Breton Club, Barnave, Duport, and Lameth, whose 
youth and ardent courage made them willing to accept and make 
the best of any change. They believed in the people, and were 
ready to pardon even its excesses. More prudent and still more 
prominent were two men who played a great part in the constituent 
assembly, Sieyés, its legislator, and Mirabeau, its orator. Mirabeau 
was undoubtedly the great man of the day. Born of a noble family, 
he had been driven to vice and despair by the persecutions of his 
father, and he had conceived a bitter loathing for the political and 
social system that had made such treatment possible. Hence he 
had thrown himself heart and soul into the revolutionary movement, 
had employed his pen and his voice to maintain the courage of the ~ 
assembly and to excite the wrath of the people. So incessant was 
his activity and so wide-spread were his connections that his 


A.D. 1789. MIRABEAU. 503 


enemies attributed every outbreak to his intrigues. His attacks 
upon the queen had roused the bitter enmity of the court, where 
he was regarded as the apostle of rebellion and of unbelief. But 
Mirabeau, though liable to lose his self-control in fits of passion, 
was not a mere destroyer, and was not without a plan of his own 
for the regeneration of France. His enmity was satisfied by the 
destruction of the privileged classes from which he had severed 
himself; he had no. quarrel with the monarchy, of which he now 
became the champion. He was convinced that the changes that 
had been made were not inconsistent with the existence of a strong 
central power, or even with that of a new aristocracy. He was 
confident that he could build up a new organism in place of the 
old, and he eagerly sought for an opportunity to make the attempt. 
His ambition—and this was well known both to friends and 
opponents—was to beaminister. It would perhaps have been well 
if the court could have made up their minds to employ him; but 
the queen regarded him as a monster and as the author of all the 
mischief, while the king disliked him as a libertine almost more 
than he feared him as a politician. As long as he was excluded 
from office, Mirabeau was forced to side with the opposition, both to 
maintain the popularity in which lay his strength, and to force his 
way to the position that was denied him. His great disadvantage 
was that he had no organised following—that he was his own 
party. His haughty and independent temper would brook no 
associates on terms of equality. He despised the assembly of 
which he was the guiding spirit; he despised mediocrities like 
Lafayette and Necker, whose popularity made them a power; and 
while he knew of the intrigues of the duke of Orleans, he always 
regarded that prince with unmixed contempt. Another point on 
which his conduct was open to attack was his pecuniary difficulties. 
He was constantly harassed by his creditors, and even when the 
death of his father left him a considerable property he never had 
the time to arrange his affairs. These circumstances and his lavish 
habits made the acquisition of money unusually important to him, 
and this laid him open to charges of venality and corruption which 
it was not easy to refute. It is impossible to assert that Mirabeau 
could have succeeded in carrying out the grand schemes which he 
so confidently propounded, or that he could have checked the 
revolutionary movement, but it is equally certain that no one else 
could. 

§ 8. The first work of the assembly after the 4th of August was 
- to resume the discussion about the rights of man, which ended in the 
issuing of the declaration on the 27th. It was a feeble and un- 
necessary imitation of the great American manifesto. Philosophi- 


504 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. xxtt. 


cal definitions were laid down by the vote of a majority, and 
principles were enunciated which, if logically carried out, would 
put an end to all government. Then the assembly took into 
consideration the proposals of a committee which had been 
authorised to prepare a scheme of the constitution. The first 
great dispute arose on the question whether the legislature should 
consist of one or two chambers. ‘The suggestion was that the first 
chamber should consist of six hundred members chosen by the 
people, while the second or senate should contain two hundred 
members, nominated by the king on the presentation of the depart- 
ments. On the left the cry was raised that this would destroy the 
equality which had just been laid down in the declaration of 
rights; on the right the nobles and clergy resented a proposal 
which disregarded all their claims and pretensions. The union of 
these two extremes decided the matter, and it was carried by a 
large majority that the legislature should be indivisible. Then 
came the still more burning question as to the relations of the 
crown and the legislature. It was proposed that the king should 
have a veto upon all laws adopted by the assembly. The left 
raised a loud outcry against a proposal which left the interests and 
wishes of twenty-five millions at the mercy of oneman. Mirabeau, 
who had previously announced his opinion on this point, vigorously 
opposed any further encroachment upon the royal power. But 
opinion was becoming agitated outside the assembly. The Palais 
Royal taught the cry @ bas le veto to a mob which thought it 
meant a kind of tax. Necker, always afraid of losing the popu- 
larity which had restored him to office, induced the king to accept 
a compromise. The veto was to be suspensive and not absolute, 
i.e. the king could postpone an act of the assembly for four years; 
but if two successive legislatures adhered to it his opposition had 
to be withdrawn. ‘The supporters of the crown found themselves 
deserted by their own leader, and the suspensive veto was decreed 
on the 21st of September. 

§ 9. Meanwhile the disorders went on in the provinces as well as 
in Paris. In the latter the number of representatives had been 
increased from 120 to 800, but without introducing any unanimity 
into the administration. The real power was in the hands of the 
national guard and of its idolised commander, Lafayette. They 
represented the bourgeoisie, or middle class, and succeeded in 
repressing the worst outrages. The Orleanists saw that a new 
effort must be made to attain their objects. Their most prominent 
leaders were the journalists, Desmoulins, Loustalot and Marat, and 
mob-orators like Danton and St. Huruge. But the real directors 
were a small knot of men who immediately surrounded the duke. 


A.D. 1789. RIOT AT VERSAILLES. 505 


They conceived the plan of either murdering the king or of 
terrifying him into flight. In either case the duke could be raised 
to power as regent if not as king. The discussion about the veto 
had given occasion for fresh disturbances, and the question of 
the king’s flight had been seriously debated at Versailles. But 
Louis himself refused to leave the coast clear for his ambitious 
and worthless relative. It was necessary to try some more direct 
attack. The conduct of the court afforded a convenient opportunity. 
The royal guards hadgbeen strengthened by the arrival of the 
regiment of Flanders, and the officers of the former entertained the 
new-comers at a banquet in the palace (October). Late in the 
evening the royal family appeared in the hall and were received with 
an outburst of enthusiasm. It was reported, probably with inten- 
tional exaggeration, that the tricolour had been trampled under 
foot in drunken excitement and that all the guests had adopted 
the white cockade. In Paris the greatest alarm was felt and 
simulated, and the most disquieting rumours of an intended 
counter-revolution were industriously circulated. On the 5th of 
October a mob of women marched to Versailles accompanied by — 
the riff-raff of the population. They entered and harangued the 
assembly, and a deputation gained admission to the king, who 
satisfied them with promises of bread and kind words. The 
national guard called upon Lafayette to lead them to Versailles 
for the maintenance of peace, but he refused to march till he had 
received orders from the municipality, and it was not till late in 
the afternoon, after the mob had come into armed collision with 
the guards, that he appeared upon the scene. His arrival restored 
order, he replaced the guards by his own troops, and after guarantee- 
ing the king’s security he retired to rest. In the early morning a 
party of rioters obtained admission into the palace by a neglected 
door. Murdering the guards whom they met, they advanced to 
the queen’s apartments, and it was only with great difficulty and 
by the heroic self-sacrifice of her defenders that she was enabled 
to escape to the king. Lafayette, who had been roused by the 
unwelcome intelligence of this new outbreak, now brought up his 
troops and cleared the palace. But outside the utmost disorder 
and excitement prevailed, and the cry was raised which had already 
been heard in the capital, “the king to Paris.” Louis was 
compelled to show himself at a window and to make a sign of 
acquiescence. Without delay the compulsory journey had to be 
undertaken, and on the evening of the 6th the royal family 
arrived at the Tuileries. They had been preceded by the mob 
bearing the heads of the murdered guards, and they were accom- 
panied by a crowd of women who declared that there was no 
23* 


506 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP, XXII. 


longer any fear of famine as they brought with them “the baker 
and the baker’s wife and the little baker’s boy.” 

Tbe 5th of October marks a new and disastrous change in the 
course of the revolution. The presence of the king and the 
government in Paris confirmed the supremacy which that city had 
assumed in France, and gave irresistible powers to the mob. So 
well appreciated were the inevitable results that when the assem- 
bly determined to follow the king, and took up its quarters in the 
riding-school near the Tuileries, more than a hundred members, 
including Mounier and Lally-Tollendal, refused to retain their 
seats. It was no wonder that men sought to discover the originator 
of the popular rising. The court attributed it to the evil influence 
of Mirabeau, but his innocence was subsequently proved to: the 
satisfaction even of Marie Antoinette, and the charge is based 
merely upon the fact that he had early information of the rising. 
The real authors of the mischief were the duke of Orleans and his 
associates, and subsequently a letter was found in his handwriting 
to the effect that ‘ the money has not been earned, as the simpleton 
_ still lives.” The court was probably aware of his atrocious designs, 
and forced him to retire for a time to England. It was on this 
occasion that Mirabeau expressed his contempt for the prince who 
had wished to be his king, and whom he would not employ as his 
lackey. 

§ 10. The removal to Paris had one unexpected result, the restora- 
tion of comparative order for a time. The middle classes, having 
obtained the supremacy that they desired, showed an unwonted 
determination to exercise it with firmness. When the mob rose 
and murdered a baker named Francois, the assembly, on Mirabeau’s 
motion, carried a strong measure which authorised the summary 
procedure of martial law, and entrusted its administration to the 
old court of the Chatelet. Lafayette and his national guard 
became masters of Paris, and the rioters, having lost their pay- 
master, retired into obscurity. But opinions were none the less 
excited because they ceased to be translated’ into action. This is 
the era of the clubs, which contributed to define more clearly the 
lines of party divisions, and which acted as a sort of link between 
the assembly and public opinion. By far the most important was 
the club which-had been originally founded by the deputies from 
Brittany, but which obtained the name of Jacobin from the quarters 
which it took up in Paris. Its character was now wholly altered, 
and it began to admit others besides members of the assembly and 
to affiliate corresponding clubs in the chief provincial cities. As 
its numbers increased, its opinions became more extreme, and several 
of its former leaders, Lafayette, Sieyés and Chapelier, deserted it to 


A.D. 1789. THE CONSTITUTION. 507 


form a new club, that of ’89. The nobles and clergy who were 
opposed to the revolution sought to imitate the tactics of their 
enemies and formed a club of their own, which, after several 
changes of name, was suppressed by the municipality as a source of 
disorder. These and numerous other clubs served to maintain the 
public interest in political questions, while the assembly took 
advantage of the restoration of order to continue its work of 
establishing the constitution. It will be convenient to summarise 
their labours instead of endeavouring to follow the chronological 
course of their decrees, which took several months to elaborate. 

§ 11. One of the earliest and most important tasks which the as- 
sembly undertook was to destroy the old system of provincial adminis- 
tration, as they had already destroyed that of the central government. 
On the 23rd of December, 1789, the old provinces were completely 
abolished, with all their separate privileges and institutions, with 
all that marked the fact that they had once been independent 
states. France was divided into eighty-three departments, whose 
boundaries were merely geographical and whose names had to be 
invented on the spot. The departments, which were as nearly as 
possible equal in extent, were subdivided into districts, and these 
again into rural cantons, containing five or six parishes, and into 
communes. All these divisions were to have a regular organisation 
based upon the same model. The department had an administra- 
tive council of thirty-six members and an acting directory of five ; 
the district had also a smaller council and directory, though 
subordinate to those of the department. The canton was originally 
intended to be merely an electoral unit, in which all active citizens 
assembled to choose electors, and these latter were to choose every 
two years the members of the various councils or directories, and 
also the deputies to the next legislative chamber. An active 
citizen was a man who paid a direct tax amounting to at least 
three days’ wages: to be a member of any of the councils a man 
must pay at least fifty days’ wages, while a still higher qualification 
was exacted for members of the legislature. These subdivisions 
were sufficiently contrary to the rights of man, but they serve to 
show how entirely the middle class had the upper hand at this 
time. The commune, which was the most important of the newly 
organised divisions, was to be governed by a council and an 
executive municipality, their number were to be proportioned to 
that of the population, and they were to be chosen, not by 
intermediary electors, but directly by the people. These changes 
were not exactly models of legislative wisdom. Their object was 
to establish the national unity, to make people no longer Normans 
or Bretons or Gascons, but simply Frenchmen. But one evil was 


508 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. XxII. 


only avoided by incurring a greater. The units were so much 
stronger than the central government that the 44,000 communes 
seemed likely to develop into so many independent republics. 
But it was a sufficiently striking departure from the old system 
when a score or two of intendants under the minister cf finance 
governed the whole of France. Now it was reckoned that one 
man out of every thirty-four was an elected official. Naturally 
the greatest discontent was aroused in the provinces, which were 
proud of their separate existence; and in some, as in Dauphiné, an 
attempt was made to oppose the will of the assembly. But the 
passion for unity was strong in France, and the efforts of the 
champions of provincial independence were soon swallowed up in 
the more dangerous movements of the privileged classes. 

The reforms in the judicial administration were almost equally 
sweeping and extensive: that they were more prudent is probably 
due to the presence of numerous able and experienced lawyers in 
the assembly. The old parliaments, one of the sturdiest elements 
of the old régime, disappeared as a matter of course. Now that 
offices were no longer saleable and the administration of justice was 
gratuitous, their existence became impossible. Trial by jury was 
unanimously introduced in criminal cases, but the lawyers success- 
fully opposed its employment to decide civil cases where questions 
of law were mixed up with those of fact. The new judicial 
institutions were naturally based upon the local divisions. Every 
department had a criminal court, every district: a civil court, a 
supreme court of cassation was established in Paris. Even the 
canton was made a judicial unit and received juges de paix, or 
justices of the peace. Torture and Jettres de cachet were prohibited, 
heresy and witchcraft ceased to be crimes, and the punishment of 
death was limited to a very few offences. A great stand was made 
by the royalists on the question whether the judges should be 
appointed by the king. But the natural dread of royal intervention 
in judicial matters was too strong, and it was carried that they 
should be chosen from among the lawyer class by the electors of 
the various districts and departments. This was the great defect 
of the new system. The old courts may have been corrupt, but 
they were at least independent. In the administration of justice 
the influence of the mob is at least as dangerous an evil as the 
despotism of a monarch. 

§ 12. While these great measures were being discussed, the assem- 
bly was always being confronted with the great problem of France, 
the finances. Their condition had been steadily going from bad to 
worse, because the disorders of the revolution had cut off many of 
the sources of revenue, while the expenditure had been enormously 


A.D. 1790. THE ASSIGNATS. 509 


increased. Huge sums had been swallowed up in providing Paris 
with corn, in organising the national guard, and in compensating 
the members of the parliaments. The assembly had naturally 
wished to postpone the granting of money until the constitution 
was completed, but the pressure of immediate necessities had been 
too strong. Necker pursued his usual policy of disguising the real 
condition of things, and sought only to postpone bankruptcy by 
temporary palliatives. He had demanded and obtained two loans, 
one of thirty and another of eighty millions, but through deficient 
information the assembly fixed the rate of interest too low, and 
neither was successful. Then he demanded a patriotic contribution 
of a fourth of every income, the assessment to be made on the 
declaration of each individual. This had been carried by the impe- 
tuous oratory of Mirabeau, who insisted that as the assembly 
depended for its financial information on the minister, he must be 
implicitly trusted and must accept the sole responsibility for the 
measures which he recommended. Still the needs of the govern- 
ment were as pressing as ever, and Necker’s resources seemed to be 
exhausted. He had hoped for a moment that the tithes might be 
employed for state uses, but the deputies had preferred to make a 
present of them to the landowners. It was in these circumstances 
that Talleyrand pointed to what seemed at first sight a source of 
boundless wealth, the estates of the church. He maintained that 
the clergy were not the owners but only the administrators and 
trustees of their domains, and he therefore proposed that the nation 
should appropriate them, and at the same time undertake to provide 
for the clergy and for the expenses of public worship. A tremen- 
dous outcry was raised by the class whoin it was proposed to 
despoil, but in vain, and it was decreed that the property of the 
church stood at the disposal of the nation. It was hoped that this 
measure would give renewed security to public credit, but as the 
hope was disappointed it became necessary to proceed to action. A 
decree of the 19th of December, 1789, ordered the sale of church 
property to the value of 400 millions. But the general feeling of 
insecurity was so great that no purchasers could be found, and for 
some time the edict was fruitless. It was not for three months 
that a way was found out of the difficulty. The muncipalities, 
Paris at their head, undertook to purchase the estates in the hope 
of gradually selling them to individuals and making a profit out of 
the transaction. As they could not afford to pay in ready money 
they were allowed to issue bonds on which interest was given, and 
these were employed by the state to satisfy its creditors. Before 
long this use of paper money was adopted by the government itself 
on « larger scale. Asstgnats in proportion to a given amount of 


510 MODERN EUROPE. OnAP. xxtt. 


church property were issued by the state and their circulation was 
made compulsory. On application the holder of one of these 
assignats could realise in land, and thus the property was gradually 
sold, while becoming immediately available for the needs of the 
exchequer. Thus at last the financial problem was solved, though 
only for a time and not without disastrous results in the future. 

The clergy, who had at first been more in sympathy with the 
revolution than the nobles, became now equally antagonistic, and 
did all in their power to obstruct the progress of affairs. The 
reforming party now discovered that the church was an essential 
part of the old régime, and, as a privileged and exceptional body, 
was inconsistent with the revolutionary organisation. ‘The financial 
needs which had suggested the attack on property were replaced by 
other and less practical motives when it came to altering the con- 
stitution. There were a number of Jansenists in the assembly 
who had a long score of oppression and ill-treatment to settle with 
the orthodox clergy. There were a still larger number of men who 
had imbibed the doctrines of Voltaire and the encyclopedists, and 
who were not likely to neglect an opportunity of giving expression 
to their opinions. The first step was taken by destroying the 
monasteries and all the orders except those which employed them- 
selves in works of charity. Their wealth was confiscated, but their 
members received pensions from the state. In July, 1790, the 
assembly took a further step, and decreed the civil constitution of the 
clergy. The old geographical divisions were abolished and every 
department was made into a bishopric. The bishops and parish 
priests were to be chosen, like the secular magistrates and officials, 
by the electors of the departments and districts. The cathedral 
chapters were abolished, no demand was to be made for a papal 
confirmation, and the authority of no bishop or metropolitan was to 
be recognised whose see did not lie within the boundaries of France. 
The pecuniary treatment of the church was neither lavish nor par- 
simonious. -‘The salaries of the bishops were lowered, but those ot 
the curés were raised. 

The civil constitution roused the clergy to open war against the 
revolution, which at this time celebrated with great pomp the first 
anniversary of the 14th of July. The assembly was exasperated 
into following up one false step by another. In November it was 
ordered that all the clergy should take an oath to observe the civil 
constitution under penalty of dismissal. This provoked an imme- 
diate schism which gave speedy occasion for a civil war. An 
enormous number of priests refused the oath and were replaced by 
others. But the refractory priests were in most cases the most 
virtuous, and naturally retained their hold on their congregations in 


A.D. 1790. THE CONSTITUTION 511 


mavy places. This schism proved one of the most serious obstacles 
to the revolution. Before this the assembly had completed its 
attack upon the nobles by abolishing all titles and liveries. Hence- 
forth the privileged classes formed a close alliance for the recovery 
of their rights. ‘The opposition of the magistrates had caused 
agitation without result ; that of the clergy kindled a civil war; that 
of the nobles, in which the other classes combined, was destined to 
produce the foreign invasion of France.” 

§ 13. In 1790 a quarrel broke out between England and Spain 
about the territory of Nootka Sound, in California, and it seemed likely 
that the Family Compact of the Bourbons would involve France in the 
contest. This gave rise to an important discussion as to whether 
the right of making peace and war should be invested in the crown 
under. the new constitution. The revolutionary party, still in- 
fluenced by an overpowering suspicion and dread of the royal 
power, wished to transfer this right to the assembly. Mirabeau 
triumphantly pointed out that sufficient trammels had been im- 
posed to remove all danger of royal despotism, and denounced the 
absurdity of attributing an essential function of the executive 
to a legislative assembly. This defection of the great tribune 
disconcerted the majority. The Jacobins put up Barnave to 
answer him, and a pamphlet was hawked about the street, ‘“‘ The 
Great Treason of Count Mirabeau.” But the next day Mirabeau 
returned to the attack, tore Barnave’s eloquent sophistries to pieces, 
and compelled the reluctant assembly to accept a compromise. It 
was decreed that “ war can only be decided upon by a decree of the 
assembly, based upon a formal and express proposition from the 
king and sanctioned by him. The king alone can maintain relations 
with foreign powers, appoint negotiators, take preliminary measures 
for war, and direct its operations.” In spite of this victory, as it was 
regarded at the time, the royal power was seriously lessened. . The 
title of “ King of the French” was substituted for that of “ King 
of France,” and the bolder was regarded merely as the chief official of 
an all-powerful people. His domains were taken as national property, 
and a civil list of 25 million francs allowed him in their stead. 

The rapid march of the revolution must not be attributed only 
to the energy of the extreme party. The adherents of: the old 
régime pursued a miserable policy, which showed that their passions 
had overcome their reason. Instead of accepting what was in- 
evitable and conciliating the people by a moderation which would 
have won them many adherents, they sought only to discredit 
their adversaries by irritating them into taking violent measures. 
By studiously insulting speeches, by disorderly conduct, which 
several times brought the assembly to the verge of open fighting, 


512 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. xx. 


they discredited themselves and the monarchy; and when the 
most important questions came on for decision they usually walked 
out without voting. Equally blameable was the invincible weak- 
ness and vacillation of the king, who remained perfectly passive, 
and could never bring himself to refuse his sanction to the most 
harmful decrees. But the most culpable of all were the ministers, 
Necker at their head, who simply obliterated themselves and left 
the whole responsibility of the government to the assembly and 
the local councils. 

§ 14. The true policy of the king was to have allied himself closely 
with the moderate party, and to have exercised by their means an 
influence over the course of events. ‘There was one man whose 
friendship was as valuable as his enmity was dangerous, Mirabeau, 
who after the abolition of titles became plain M. Riquetti. An 
opponent of the old régime, but a supporter of the monarchy, he 
took the first step in offering his assistance to the court. His most 
intimate friend, the count de Lamarck, was a Belgian noble who was 
attached both by origin and sympathy to Marie Antoinette, and he 
acted as mediator in the matter. Mirabeau, falsely accused of being 
an author of the rising on the 5th of October, was really profoundly 
opposed to the king’s residence in Paris. Directly afterwards he 
drew up a memorial, in which he urged Louis to escape to some 
other town in France, and dwelt earnestly on the inevitable results 
of remaining in the hands of the Paris mob. ‘The document was 
conveyed by Lamarck to the count of Provence, but no notice was 
taken of it. It was at this time that Mirabeau conceived the 
design of forcing himself into the ministry, and to facilitate this 
he proposed that the ministers should be invited to take seats in 
the assembly. But his attitude and ambition iuspired distrust 
amongst his former associates, and a law was carried (6 November, 
1789) that no member of the assembly should hold office during 
its session. This was a direct blow to all his hopes, and also to - 
the prospects of stable government in France. It was evident that 
the prejudices against him at court were very strong, and for some 
time he gave way to despair. Lamarck left Paris until he was 
suddenly recalled by the Austrian ambassador, de Mercy. It had 
at last been decided to make use of Mirabeau, but the king in- 
sisted that the matter should be kept an absolute secret from the 
ministers. The agreement was made in May, 1790. The king 
paid Mirabeau 6000 francs a month, and discharged all his debts, 
amounting to 208,000. Mirabeau, on his side, undertook to defend 
the monarchy, to keep the king informed about the course of 
aftairs, and to advise him as to the policy which he considered 
advisable. The arrangement was hardly followed by the results 


A.D. 1790-1791. DEATH OF MIRABEAU. 513 


that were expected by either party. Mirabeau’s advice was taken, 
but rarely followed, and he found that he was no more powerful 
than he had been before. He still urged the king to leave Paris, 
even at the risk of exciting civil war; but he warned him against 
encouraging a foreign invasion, which would only unite the whole 
nation against him. A great obstacle in his way was Lafayette, 
now the most powerful man in France, whom he regarded with 
mingled distrust and contempt, but whom he was compelled to 
try and gain over without success. ‘The return of the duke of 
Orleans was a slight advantage, because it raised a rival to the 
popular general, who seemed to aspire to the part of a second 
Cromwell. But on the whole the situation of affairs was very 
adverse. The queen, on whose courage and decision he relied to 
influence the king, took no keen interest in public affairs, and was 
easily induced to take a hopeful view of things. Necker and most 
of the ministers, whom he still denounced with bitter malignity in 
the assembly, were hostile, and it was not for some time that he 
established a connection with the minister of foreign affairs, M. de 
Montmorin. The departure of Mercy to the Netherlands was a 
great blow to him, as he thus lost the only man who could have 
induced the king and queen to adopt his views. In September, 
1790, Necker suddenly threw up his office and quitted France, 
wicre his departure excited no regret and hardly any attention, 
Soon afterwards his colleagues, with the exception of Montmorin, 
were dismissed. But Mirabeau reaped none of the expected ad- 
vantages from the change. The new ministers were nearly all 
nominees of Lafayette, and all co-operation with them was im- 
practicable. Still he continued his prodigious activity, and sought, 
by a regular organisation in Paris and the provinces, to prepare 
public opinion for a reacticn. He had no intention of restoring 
the old system, and he had easily convinced the king that such a 
thing was impossible. But he thought, and rightly, that France 
might be socially democratic and yet subject to a strong and orderly 
government. ‘The first essential was to induce the king to seek 
some other residence, and Lamarck was sent to sound the fidelity 
of M. de Bouillé, the governor of Metz. Mirabeau became more 
and more sanguine as his grand scheme seemed to approach realisa- 
tion. His eloquence was triumphantly displayed in denouncing 
the proposal of a tyrannical law to prevent emigration. But his 
health had long been undermined by his incessant labours, and by 
the excesses of his private life. On the 27th of March, 1791, he 
was seized by a serious illness, and on the 2nd of April he died in 
the arms of Lamarck. With him perished the greatest man of the 
revolutionary epoch, and the last hope of the French monarchy. 


514 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. xxit. 


§ 15. The position of the king was naturally not improved by the 
loss of his most powerful ally, and the project of flight continued to 
occupy the attention of the court. The people were profoundly 
indignant at the employment of non-juring priests by the royal 
family, and when the king proposed to pass Easter at St. Cloud his 
carriage was forcibly arrested by the mob. Bailly and Lafayette 
did all in their power to induce the people to respect the liberty of 
their sovereign. The national guard refused to obey their leader, 
who resigned his command, only to resume it after three days. 
This proof that he was a prisoner impelled the king to resume 
the plan which had already been concerted. On the evening of the 
20th of June he left the Tuileries with the queen and their three 
children, and took the road to Montmédy, where the troops were 
prepared for his reception. At the same time his brother, the count 
of Provence, departed by another road, and succeeded in reaching 
Brussels without risk. But Louis XVI. was less fortunate. At 
St. Ménéhould he was recognised, and at Varennes he was arrested. 
Bouillé with his dragoons arrived too late to release him, the troops 
were even doubtful in their allegiance, and their commander 
hastened to join the emigrants beyond the frontier. The un- 
fortunate king was brought back to Paris and escorted to the 
Tuileries amidst the ominous silence of an enormous crowd. 

The news of his departure, which became public on the morning 
of the 21st, created a profound impression in the capital. For a 
moment the opponents of the revolution hoped for an outbreak of 
anarchy which would favour and justify their reactionary designs. 
But the assembly showed itself equal to the occasion. After a 
proclamation, which the king left behind to explain his motives, had 
been read, it was decreed that the ministers and all other function- 
aries should be bound to obey the assembly; that an oath should 
be taken to that effect both by them and by the military officers ; 
that all edicts should have the force of law without sanction 
during the king’s absence; that foreign courts should be assured of 
the pacific intentions of France; and that commissioners should be 
appointed to arrange for the defence of the frontiers. ‘In less than 
four hours,” says Ferriéres, “the assembly was invested with all 
powers, the government went on, there was no shock to public 
tranquillity. Paris and France learnt by this experience, which has 
proved so disastrous to royalty, that the monarch is almost always 
a stranger to the government which exists in his name.” 

On the king’s return it was decided that his provisional suspen- 
sion should be continued until the completion of the constitution, 
and that he should be strictly guarded. The next three months 
were a real interregnum in France, and during this period party 


A.D. 1791. THE CONSTITUTION. 515 


differences and passions revived with a vigour that seemed to 
threaten a renewal of the disorders of 1789. More than 200 of the 
extreme royalists protested against the king’s suspension and with- 
drew from the assembly. On the other hand the most advanced 
section of the Jacobins, and the Orleanist party which revived under 
these favourable circumstances, clamoured that the king had for- 
feited his crown, and demanded either a new ruler or a republic. 
The destruction of the monarchy would involve the utter ruin of 
the constitution which the assembly had spent so much time and 
labour in preparing. The majority, who regarded their own work 
with a reverence almost amounting to awe, were not prepared to 
sacrifice it for the gratification of a few fanatics like Robespierre, 
Pétion, Danton, Brissot and Marat. But Robespierre succeeded in 
gaining the ear of the people and in maintaining his supremacy in 
the Jacobin club. It is at this crisis that he becomes for the first 
time a great power in France. His enemies were compelled to 
secede and to form a new club of their own, the Fewillants or the 
Constitutionalists. Lafayette, Bailly and Sieyés found themselves 
reinforced by unaccustomed allies, Barnave, the two Lameths, 
Duport, Chapelier and others, and for a time they seemed to carry 
all before them. But the Jacobins stood firm, and their affiliations 
in the provinces soon gave them a great superiority. ‘Their 
emissaries stirred the people to fresh outbreaks in order to intimidate 
the assembly. On the 17th of July the national guard came into 
violent collision with the mob on the Champ de Mars, and after 
long hesitation Lafayette gave the fatal order to fire. ‘Two hundred 
were killed or wounded and the tumult was suppressed, but 
Lafayette’s. popularity was gone. 

§ 16. The constitution had already been completed by the spring 
of 1791. In May Robespierre had carried a self-denying ordinance 
which. was destined to ruin all that had been accomplished. It 
was decided that no member of the present assembly should be 
admissible either as an elector or as a deputy to its successor. 
This entrusted the government at a critical time to men without 
experience, who would naturally be induced to question the wisdom 
of their predecessors and who would be elected at a time of un- 
paralleled excitement. The adoption of this lamentable and fatal 
decree was due to a combination of the extreme left with the reckless 
party, of reaction who cared little to what evils they exposed France 
so long as they overthrew the hated constitution. The last few 
months were passed in revising the work already accomplished, and 
only the firmness of the moderate majority prevented the adoption 
of fundamental changes. Finally, to secure the permanence of their 
creation they decreed that “the nation has the right to revise its 


516 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP, XXII 


constitution when it pleases; but the assembly declares that its 
interest invites it to suspend that right for thirty years.” 

On the 3rd of September the constitution was submitted to the 
king, who demanded time for its consideration. On the 14th he 
issued a letter in which he said: “I accept the constitution. I 
engage to maintain it within, to defend it against all attacks from 
without, to enforce its execution by all the means that it places at 
my disposal; I declare that, informed of the adhesion which the 
great majority of the people gives to the constitution, I renounce 
the share which I had claimed in the work; that, as I am responsi- 
ble to the nation alone, no one else, when I have made this renun- 
ciation, has the right to complain.” The last acts of the constituent 
assembly were a futile attack upon the Jacobin club, and a decree of 
amnesty to all persons accused and imprisoned for complicity in the 
king’s fight. On the 30th of September it dissolved itself. 


III. EvuroPE AND THE REVOLUTION. 


§ 17. The course of events in France was naturally followed with 
the keenest interest and anxiety by the European powers. ‘The 
declaration of the rights of man involved open hostility to the 
principles on which the government of other states was carried on. 
The spread of the revolutionary propaganda, which was avowed as an 
object by so many of the most enthusiastic Frenchmen, wasa danger 
which could not be disregarded by rulers who wished to maintain 
the old régime. Many of the sovereigns of Europe were allied by 
family ties with the royal family of France, and regarded their 
sufferings with unmingled pity and horror. The kings of Spain 
and Naples were themselves Bourbons, and looked up to Louis XVI. 
as the head of their house. The king of Sardinia, Victor 
Amadeus III., was the father-in-law of the count of Artois. The 
successive emperors, Joseph II. and Leopold II., and also the elector 
of Cologne, were brothers of Marie Antoinette. Moreover open 
inroads were made upon the rights of neighbouring princes at 
__the very outbreak of the revolution. The county of Venaissin and 
the city of Avignon had belonged to the papacy ever since the 
14th century, but in consequence of disorders which were aroused 
by the civil constitution of the church, the constituent assembly 
had decreed their union with France and their formation into an 
84th department. Again, in Alsace and other border-provinces 
which had once belonged to the empire, a number of rights and 
possessions had been expressly reserved by treaty to several 
German princes. All these were abolished by the famous resolu- 
tions of the 4th of August and by the subsequent measures to effect 


A.D. 1791. EUROPE AND THE REVOLUTION. 517 


the unity of France. Although compensation had been offered, it 
was too scanty to be accepted. The injured princes, including the 
ereat Rhenish electors, the bishops of Strasburg, Speier and Basel, 
the rulers of Wurtemberg, Zweibriicken, Hesse-Darmstadt, Baden 
and many others, clamoured for redress to the diet, which adopted 
their cause and called upon the emperor to take practical measures 
to carry out its decrees. 

These circumstances gave great encouragement to the hopes of 
the emigrants, who never disguised their policy of forming an 
European coalition against France, and restoring the old system of 
government with the help of an irresistible force. They established 
a sort of court in Coblentz, and their followers thronged in all the 
neighbouring towns of the Rhine district. The king’s brothers 
claimed to represent the real government of France, and as such to 
conduct independent negotiations. They were utterly reckless of 
the dangers to which their conduct exposed Louis X VI. ; and when 
he remonstrated with them they replied that they knew he was 
not a free agent, and therefore they would pay no attention to 
letters which must be dictated to him. All the frivolities and 
rivalries of the old court were revived at Coblentz. A man’s 
merits were reckoned by the date of his emigration, and when 
Cazales, who had upheld the cause of the monarchy with con- 
spicuous courage to the last moment, arrived among them, he was 
treated with scornful coolness, The incapable Calonne became a 
sort of prime minister, and was not a whit more earnest or compe- 
tent at Coblentz than he had been at Versailles. 

§ 18. Offers of sympathy and assistance were not slow in arriving 
to encourage the extravagant hopes of the emigrants. The electors of 
Cologne and Trier, in whose territories they had found a home, were 
eager to espouse a cause which involved interests of their own. By 
a visit to Turin the count of Artois had secured the co-operation 
of his father-in-law, the king of Sardinia, The kings of Naples 
and Spain expressed their willingness to fulfil their obligations as 
members of the House of Bourbon. Gustavus ILI. of Sweden, who 
had restored autocracy in his own kingdom, was eager to head a 
crusade in the great cause of monarchy. He was encouraged by 
his recent enemy, Catharine II. of Russia, who saw a grand 
advantage for her plans in the east if she could involve the western 
powers in a great war with France. The susceptible Frederick 
William II. of Prussia, who looked back with complacency to the 
ease with which he had restored the stadtholder in the Hague, and 
who was profoundly touched by the disasters of Louis XVI., was 
not likely to refuse to join in a general movement for his assistance. 
But the man to whom every one looked to decide the question 


518 MODERN EUROPE. Cuap. XXII. 


whether Europe should or should not interfere in France, was the 
cool and cautious emperor Leopold II. He had escaped from most 
of the difficulties which the imprudence of his elder brother had 
bequeathed to him. He had avoided a threatened rupture with 
Prussia by the treaty of Reichenbach; he had put down the 
rising in Belgium, and had appeased the internal troubles of 
Hungary. At first sight it seemed that he must inevitably 
espouse the cause of the falling French monarchy. His affection 
for his sister, his experience of the dangers of a revolutionary 
movement in Belgium and Liége, the neighbourhood of these 
provinces to France, and his duty as emperor to redress the wrongs 
of his injured vassals, all seemed to point in the same direction. 
But Leopold was opposed by temperament to hasty measures and 
to a military policy, and, like Joseph II., he made the interests of 
Austria his first care. He had not yet arranged terms of peace 
with the Porte, and until then his relations with Prussia were 
uncertain. Above everything, he was anxious about the ambition 
of Russia, and was determined not to leave Catharine free to carry 
out her will in Turkey and Poland. But the importunity of the 
diet, and the news of the king’s attempted flight and arrest at 
Varennes, forced him into some approach to action. From Padua 
he issued a circular (6 July) to the European powers, in which he 
called upon them to espouse the cause of the French king as their 
own, to refuse to recognise any laws in France unless the king were 
restored to liberty and accepted them of his own free will, and in case 
these representations were disregarded to resort to arms. But the 
circular served no purpose except to excite new indignation in 
France, and to make the imprisonment of the royal family more 
severe. Leopold was driven still further towards intervention 
against his will. He concluded the treaty of Sistowa with the 
Porte and drew closer to Prussia. By personal flattery he gained 
a complete mastery over the Prussian envoy, Bischofswerder, who 
signed a preliminary treaty with Austria (25 July) in opposition 
to the express instructions of his own court. From this time the 
policy of Frederick the Great and Hertzberg was abandoned at 
Berlin, and the king acted in defiance of the strong feeling that still 
existed against an alliance with Austria. On the 27th of August 
Leopold and Frederick William held a conference at Pilnitz. To 
their ill-concealed disgust the count of Artois thrust his presence 
upon them, and demanded their consent to a ready-made scheme in 
which the selfish arrogance of the emigrants was clearly dis- 
played. The scheme was definitely rejected, and the emigrants 
were warned that, though their residence on German soil was 
tolerated, they would not be allowed to conduct armed preparations 


A.p. 1791. THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY. 519 


The emperor and king then issued a joint declaration, in which 
they maintained that the restoration of order and of monarchy in 
France were matters of great moment for the whole of Europe, 
invited the other powers to co-operate with them in the work, and 
“then and in that case” promised active intervention. The 
italicised words give the key to Leopold’s policy. He was deter- 
mined to avoid a war if possible. He knew already that Pitt’s 
ministry had virtually decided on the neutrality of England, and 
that therefore the hypothetical case in which action was necessary 
could not exist. The declaration of Pilnitz, accompanied by the 
answer to the count of Artois, was really an assurance of peace, 
instead of being the origin of the war, as French historians have 
represented. Leopold urged Louis XVI. to accept the constitution, 
and was delighted when the king followed his advice on the 
14th of September. As Louis now recovered his crown, and at any 
rate nominally his liberty, the emperor issued a circular to 
announce that the necessity for an European coalition no longer 
existed. The question whether there should be war or not 
depended now upon the attitude of France itself. 


IV. Tue LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY.—OUTBREAK OF WaArR.—FALL 
or THE MoNARCHY. 


§ 19. The second national assembly of France, which had been 
chosen according to the forms of the new constitution during the exist- 
ence of its predecessor, held its first sitting on the 1st of October, 
1791. It contained 745 members, of whom more than .300 were 
lawyers, and about 70 journalists. From the first it was evident that 
the legislative assembly, as it called itself, was wholly different in 
character from the constituent. The self-denying ordinance had 
excluded all the former deputies, the court nobles and clergy had 
exercised no influence over the elections, there were absolutely no 
adherents of the old monarchy and class privileges. The extreme 
right was formed by the constitutional party, or Fewzllants, the 
firm supporters of the constitution and eager for the establishment 
of a permanent government. Their leading members, Dumas, 
Beugnot, Vaublanc, etc., were not men of great importance, but 
they were supported by the bulk of the middle classes, by a 
majority of the national guard, and by the great reputation of men: 
like Lafayette, Barnave and Bailly. This was the party with 
which the king ought to have allied himself. But Louis XVI. at 
this time was surrounded by royalist ministers, of whom the chief 
were Bertrand de Moleville, Delessart and Duportail, and he still 
cherished the hope of evading the checks imposed by the constitu- 


520 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. XXII. 


tion which he had formally accepted. Moreover, the queen had an 
intense personal hatred of Lafayette, who was now the only man 
who could stay the course of the revolution. It was a great 
misfortune, both for themselves and for France, that the Feuillants 
at this time lost their hold upon the capital. In consequence of 
changes introduced by the constitution Bailly resigned the office 
of mayor, and Lafayette the command of the national guard. The 
latter was now entrusted to six officers, who held it for a month in 
turn. Lafayette was a candidate for the mayoralty, but the court 
blindly gave its support to his rival, Pétion, a leader of the Jacobins, 
who obtained a majority of votes. This was a great blow to the 
constitutionalists. A minority in the assembly, powerless in the 
commune, they soon found themselves reduced to complete insig- 
nificance in the rapid onward march of events. 

On the left of the assembly were the men who wished to develop 
the revolution, i.e. to introduce a republic. ‘They were divided into 
two sections, the Jacobins, who were afterwards known as the 
Mountain, and the Girondists. The Jacobins, led by Bazire, 
Merlin de Thionville, Couthon, etc., were strong neither in numbers 
nor in reputation, but they had the all-important support of their 
great club, with Robespierre at its head, and they were backed up by 
the active demagogues and the mob of the lower classes. Far more 
numerous and important, as regards the assembly itself, were their 
rivals, headed by men from the Gironde, and from other districts 
of southern France. They were nearly all young men, and ardent 
believers in the sacred cause of revolution. ‘They disliked the 
monarchy, and they relied upon the people. Their strength lay in 
their eloquence, their weakness in their want of statesmanship and 
of practical experience. They formed an almost unique collection 
of orators, but they proved utterly incapable of governing France. 
The guiding spirit of the Girondists was Madame Roland, whose 
husband was one of the deputies. Among the most conspicuous of 
the leaders were Vergniaud, the orator of the party, Condorcet, the 
philosopher who aspired to play the part of Sieyés in the new 
assembly, Guadet, Gensonné, Isnard, and Barharoux. Brissot, 
deputy four Paris and a disciple of Thomas Payne, who had at 
one time been dictator of the Jacobin club, was the most ex- 
perienced and practical of the Girondists, who were at first called 
after him, but his influence gradually declined before the more 
aitractive but shadowy enthusiasm of Madame Roland and her 
immediate circle. Dumouriez was also regarded as a member 
of this group, but he soon emancipated himself from the bonds cf 
party to play a brief but dazzling part of his own. Besides these 
three well-defined divisions of the assembly, there were some 200 


A.D. 1791. THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY. 521 


independent members, who formed the centre and whose votes were 
the great object of the various party leaders. 

§ 20. From the first it was evident that the relations of the king 
with the assembly were not likely to be very cordial. The revolution 
was threatened by two dangerous enemies, the emigrants, who were 
urging on a foreign invasion, and the non-juring bishops and priests 
who were doing all in their power to excite domestic rebellion. 
‘The latter were really the more dangerous, and already their bitter 
denunciations of the “intruders,” as they called the clergy who 
accepted the civil constitution, had aroused tumults in Calvados, 
Gevaudan and La Vendée. The Girondists clamoured for repressive 
measures, On the 30th of October it was decreed that the count of 
Provence, unless he returned within two montlis, should forfeit all 
rights to the regency. On the 9thof November an edict threatened 
the emigrants with confiscation and death unless they returned to 
their allegiance before the end cf the year. On the 29th of 
November came the attack upon the non-jurors. ‘hey were called 
upon to take the oath within eight days, when lists were to be 
drawn up of those who refused; these were then to forfeit their 
pensions, and if any disturbance took place in their district they 
were to be removed from it, or if their complicity were proved they 
were to be imprisoned for two years. The king accepted the 
decree against his brother, but he opposed his veto to the other two. 
The Girondists and Jacobins eagerly seized the opportunity for a 
new attack upon the monarchy. ‘They maintained that the two 
decrees were not laws, but prdctical measures of immediate impor- 
tance, and that the veto was out of the question in such a case. 
There was considerable weight in their arguments, but the fault 
lay not with the king but with the constituent assembly. By 
making the veto suspensive they implied that it referred only to 
legislative enactments; but they had not expressly stated this, 
and they had failed to provide for circumstances which had never 
occurred to them. ‘The blame rests partly on the exceptional and 
deranged position of affairs. The decrees were really intended, 
whether rightly or wrongly, to protect the kingdom against foreign 
and civil war. As such they ought to have originated with the 
king and ministers, and then been submitted to the assembly for 
approval, instead cf originating with the assembly, and being 
exposed to the royal veto. It is one of innumerable instances of 
the fatal way in which the legislature at this time usurped, instead 
of controlling, the functions of the executive. . 

§ 21. Throughout the winter attention was devoted almost exclu- 
sively to foreign affairs. It has been seen that the emperor was really 
eager for peace, and that as long as he remained in that mood there 

24 


522 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP, Xx11. 


was little risk of any other prince taking the initiative. At the 
same time it must be acknowledged that Leopold’s tone towards 
the French government was often too haughty and menacing to be 
conciliatory, and also that the open preparations of the emigrants 
in neighbouring states constituted an insult if not a danger to 
France. The Girondists, the most susceptible of men, cnly ex- 
pressed the national sentiment in dwelling upon this with bitterness, 
and in calling for vengeance. At the same time they had conceived 
the definite idea that their own supremacy could best be obtained 
and secured by forcing on a foreign war. ‘This was expressly 
~ avowed by Brissot, who took the lead of the party in this matter. 
Robespierre, on the other hand, partly through temperament and 
partly through jealousy of his brilliant rivals, was inclined to the 
maintenance of peace. But on this point the Feuillants were agreed 
with the Gironde, and so a vast majority was formed to force the 
unwilling king and ministers into war. The first great step was 
taken when Duportail, who had charge of military affairs, was 
replaced by Narbonne, a Feuillant. Louis XVI. was compelled to 
issue a note (14 December, 1791) to the emperor and to the arch- 
bishop of Trier to the effect that if the military force of the 
emigrants were not disbanded by the 15th of January hostilities 
would be commenced against the elector. The latter at once 
ordered the cessation of the military preparations, but the emigrants 
not only refused to obey but actually insulted the French envoy. 
Leopold expressed his desire for peace, but at the same time 
declared that any attack on the electorate of Trier would be 
regarded as an act of hostility to the empire. ‘These answers were 
unsatisfactory, and Narbonne collected three armies on the frontiers 
under the command of Rochambeau, Lafayette, and Luckner, and 
amounting together toabout 150,000 men. On the 25th of January 
an explicit declaration was demanded from the emperor, with a 
threat that war would be declared unless a satisfactory answer was 
received by the 4th of March. 

Leopold II. saw all his hopes of maintaining peace in western 
Europe gradually disappearing, and was compelled to bestir himself. 
He ratified the decrees of the diet against the aggressions in Alsace, 
and on the 7th of February he finally concluded a treaty with the 
king of Prussia. ‘The two princes guaranteed to each other their 
respective territories, and agreed upon mutual assistance in case of 
attack. On the Ist of March, while still hoping to avoid a quarrel, 
Leopold II. died of a sudden illness, and with him perished the last 
possibility of peace. His son and successor, Francis II., who was 
now twenty-four, had neither his father’s ability nor his experience, 
and he was naturally more easily swayed by the anti-revolutionary 


AD. 1791-1792. OUTBREAK OF WAR. 523 


party. But it is doubtful whether Leopold himself could have 
prevented the speedy outbreak of war. ‘The Girondists combined 
all their efforts for an attack upon the minister of foreign affairs, 
Delessart, whom they accused of truckling to the enemies of the 
nation. Delessart was committed to prison, and his colleagues at 
once resigned. ‘The Gironde now came into office. The ministry 
of home affairs was given to Roland ; of war to Servan; of finance to 
Claviére. Dumouriez obtained the foreign department, Duranthon 
that of justice, and Lacoste the marine. Its enemies called it “the 
ministry of the sansculottes.” Dumouriez introduced a more 
dictatorial tone into the foreign relations, and provoked an answer 
from Vienna in which was demanded the establishment of order in 
France for the security of Europe, and the restoration to their rights 
of the pope, the clergy, and the German princes. ‘This settled the 
question, and on the 20th of April Louis XVI. appeared in the 
assembly and read with trembling voice a declaration of war 
against the king of Hungary and Bohemia. 

§ 22. The outbreak of war startled Europe and found Austria 
isolated. Prussia and Sardinia were willing to move, but had to 
organise their furces. Russia was occupied in Poland; Spain was 
uncertain, and England neutral. ‘The most ardent champion of 
royalty, Gustavus ILI. of Sweden, had died on the 29th of March. 
Dumouriez determined to take advantage of these circumstances 
for the extension of the French boundaries, and he ordered Luckner, 
Lafayette and Rochambeau to co-operate in an attack upon Belgium, 
where it was hoped that the recently suppressed rebellion would 
revive. But the French army was completely disorganised by 
recent changes, the soldiers distrusted their officers, and on the 
first approach of the enemy the cry was raised of treason, and 
all fled panic-stricken. Rochambeau resigned in disgust, and 
Lafayette and Luckner contented themselves with standing on the 
defensive. 

This first disaster roused a great outcry in Paris, where the most 
invincible suspicions were expressed about the treachery of the court 
and the “ Austrian committee” which was supposed to surround 
the queen. The mob was armed with pikes and regularly organised, 
and from this time the “ pikemen,” the force of the lower classes, 
became a formidable rival to the national guard of the bourgeoisie. 
The assembly declared itself in permanent session, disbanded the 
royal guard, and then issued two very extreme decrees. One, pro- 
posed by Servan without consulting either the king or his own 
colleagues, ordered the formation in Paris of a camp of 20,000 
volunteers from the departments. This force, ostensibly destined 
for the defence of the capital against invasion, was really intended 


————_—_ ~~ - ——_ — — —---+--: 


524 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. xxiI. 


for the maintenance of the Girondist supremacy. The other decree 
authorised the summary banishment of non-juring priests on the 
simple denunciation of twenty citizens. The king interposed his 
veto to both measures, and when Roland wrote him a letter 
containing severe strictures upon his conduct, he dismissed him, 
together with Servan and Clavitre, who were also closely identified 
with the Gironde. Dumouriez and the two other ministers whom 
the king wished to keep, now demanded the sanction of the 
decrees, and as he was still obstinate about the clergy they also 
resigned. 

§ 23. Louis now tricd to ally himself with the Feuillants, who 
rallied for his defence. ‘The new ministers, all obscure men, were 
chosen exclusively from their ranks. Lafayette, who kept an anxious 
eye upon domestic events, took the impolitic step of writing an out- 
spoken letter to the assembly, in which he denounced the Jacobin 
club as the source of all evils and demanded its suppression. ‘This 
attempt at dictation only urged the majority to extremes. On the 
20th of June a great organised rising took place in Paris. ‘The mob 
first proceeded to the assembly to present a petition for the recall 
of the ministers, and then carried their grievances to the Tuileries. 
The guards refused to oppose them, and the crowd poured into the 
palace. Louis, who showed conspicuous courage, was forced into 
a corner, where he had to wear the red cap of the Jacobins and to 
drink to the people’s health. In another room Marie Antoinette 
and her children were exposed for hours to the insults of the mob. 
At last Pétion, whose conduct left little doubt that he was a 
promoter of the riot, arrived to terminate the disorder, and the 
palace was cleared without difficulty or bloodshed. 

The first result of the 20th of June was a reaction in favour of 
the constitution and the king. ‘The Feuillants took the aggressive, 
Pétion and other leaders of the riot were formally accused. But 
the favourable opportunity was lost by the blindness of the king. 
He expected a speedy release by the foreign troops, and was un- 
willing to tie his hands by an alliance with any party to the 
revolution. Lafayette hurried to Paris to restore order by his 
personal presence. But he was coolly received by the assembly, 
which reproached him for deserting his command; and when he 
tried to raise his old troops of the national guard against the clubs 
he was foiled by the direct influence of the court. He retired in 
disgust, the constitutional party sunk into entire insignificance, and 
the last hope of saving the monarchy was gone. 

§ 24. The foreign invasion, on which the king relied for secu- 
rity, really assured the victory of his enemies. Francis II. was 
unanimously elected emperor on the 38rd of July, and his corona- 


A.D. 1792. THE PARIS MOB. 525 


tion gave the opportunity for‘a great assembly of German princes 
and of the emigrant nobles. The Prussian king had now arrived 
with 80,000 troops, and it only remained to concert the military 
measures. ‘he French people, thus threatened, felt that they 
could no longer trust a king whose sympathies were inevitably on 
the side of their foes. This sentiment was taken advantage of 
by Girondists and Jacobins to resume the designs which had been 
interrupted by the failure of the 20th of June. Vergniaud, in a 
speech of equal bitterness and eloquence, denounced the king as the 
chief source of danger to the country, and maintained that his 
treachery paralysed their aims and rendered all attempts at defence 
hopeless. The camp of 20,000 men, which Louis at last authorised, 
was summoned to Soissons; but it was decreed that the volunteers 
from the departments should march through Paris on their way. 
The contingent from Marseilles brought with them the famous 
song, composed by Rouget de Lisle, which was destined, as the 
Marseillaise, to be the war-cry of the revolutionary armies. On 
the 11th of July the assembly declared “the country in danger,’ 
and set itself at once to take precautionary measures. Pétion, who 
had been suspended by the directory of the department, was, on the 
popular demand, formally acquitted and restored to his office. The 
great national féte was held as usual on the 14th of July, and gave 
a new illustration of the depths to which the monarchy was reduced. 
The king was compelled to renew an oath which every one knew 
to be insincere, and Pétion was the hero of the day. The im- 
prudent manifesto of the Prussian commander, the duke of 
Brunswick (27 July), in which he threatened Paris with military 
execution and total destruction if the royal family were harmed, 
added fresh fuel to the rapidly growing excitement. The mob 
demanded the deposition of the king, the summons of a national 
convention, and the accusation of Lafayette. As the assembly 
showed signs of resenting this dictation, and especially refused the 
decree against Lafayette, it was decided to force its hand by a new 
rising. The Jacobins, always ready to execute what the Girondists 
could only conceive, undertook to organise an attack upon the 
Tuileries on the night of the 9th of August. No popular move- 
ment was ever more adroitly and carefully arranged. At midnight 
the signal was given, and the insurgents assembled in the Faubourg 
St. Antoine. ‘Their first act was to undertake the municipal 
government. ‘The existing council was dissolved and a provisional 
Commune, of which Danton was the head, appointed to take its 
place. ‘The measures which had been taken to defend the palace 
were adroitly countermanded. Mandat, the commander of the 
national guard, was summoned to the municipality, and when he 


526 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. xxur, 


appeared was committed to prison. On the way he was assassi- 
nated. The Commune appointed in his place the brewer Santerre, 
one of the leaders of the 20th of June. About 5 o’clock in the 
morning the king held a review of the troops assembled in the 
gardens, and discovered to his horror that they were untrust- 
worthy. 20,000 men appeared to attack the palace, and resistance 
was hopeless. In this crisis the king took the only course that 
was open to him; with his wife and children he escaped to the 
assembly, where Vergniaud assured him of their protection. 
Meanwhile a contest had commenced between the mob and the 
Swiss guards, who had received no orders to desert their posts. The 
first volley of the guards cleared the Place du Carroussel, but the 
insurgents returned to the attack, and their numbers assured them 
an ultimate victory over the heroic hand{ul of defenders. A 
deputation of the assembly was sent to calm the people, but could 
gain no hearing. The deputies sat in impotent silence, listening 
to the sounds of the combat that raged in their neighbourhood. By 
11 o’clock the hopeless struggle was over, and the mob began to 
stream into the hall, bearing the trophies of their victory. 

§ 25. The 10th of August was decisive for the history of France. 
Not only the monarchy but the assembly was now at the mercy 
of the mob. The Girondists had good reason to repent of the 
policy they had pursued. The supreme power was in the hands 
of the revolutionary Commune of Paris, and there it was not they 
but the Jacobins who were dominant. The assembly could do 
nothing but register the decrees dictated to them. The king 
was suspended and ordered to reside in the Luxemburg, and a 
National Convention was summoned to revise the constitution. 
The Girondists, Roland, Servan, and Claviére were restored to 
office, but with them Danton obtained the ministry of justice. 
The assembly was compelled to sanction the change in the 
municipality, and to confirm the election of the Commune, 
which proceeded to usurp all the functions of government. Its 
numbers were raised from 60 or 70 to 288, and among the newly 
elected members was Robespierre, who had hidden himself on the 
10th of August, but who now came forward to reap the advantage 
of a rising in which he dared not take a part. He and Danton 
became the guiding spirit of the new body which undertook to rule 
France. The Commune transferred Louis XVI. from the Luxemburg 
to the Temple, and appointed its own commissioners, Pétion and 
Santerre, to guard him: it ordered the destruction of all statues of 
kings, and demanded from the assembly the appointment. of an 
exceptional tribunal to try the enemies of the people. The deputies 
again gave way, and on the 17th of August decreed the formation 


AD. 1792: THE SEPTEMBER MASSACRES. 527 


of this tribunal, which was to be chosen by the sections and was 
to decide without appeal. The edicts for the confiscation of the 
property of emigrants and for the banishment of non-juring priests 
were now put into force, and the LY were authorised to 
arrest persons on suspicion. 

§ 26. Meanwhile the danger of invasion was as great as ever. On 
the 30th of July the Binsaisins: under the command of Brunswick, 
but accompanied by the king, had started from Coblentz and marched 
by Luxemburg to the tinier of Champagne. They were opposed by 
two armies under the command of Lafayette and Luckner, while a 
third French force under Biron and Custine defended Alsace. Then 
came the news of the 10th of August, and the question was raised 
whether the army; like the majority of the departments, would 
approve the action of the Parisians. Lafayette did not hesitate to 
pronounce against the Jacobins, and called upon Luckner to march 
with him upon Paris to restore order. But the soldiers were not 
prepared to take such an extreme course, and the other officers, with 
Dumouriez at their head, maintained that the duty of Frenchmen 
was to oppose the foreign enemy rather than their fellow-country- 
men. Lafayette, declared a traitor by the assembly and deserted 
even by Luckner, gave up all hope and fled with his friends towards 
Holland. On his way he was arrested by the enemy, who treated 
him as a prisoner of war and detained him in close confinement till 
the treaty of Campo-Formio. His command was given to Dumou- 
riez, aud Luckner was replaced by Kellermaun. These disorders 
gave a great advantage to the Prussians. Longwy capitulated on 
the 23rd of August, and the fall of Verdun on the 2nd of September 
left the road open to Paris. 

The imminence of this great danger roused great excitement 
in Paris, and gave occasion for scenes of horror far worse than any 
that had yet been witnessed. The assembly ordered defensive’ 
measures to be taken, and tried to regain its independence by sup- 
pressing the Commune. But the Commune not only refused to be sup- 
pressed, but took the whole conduct of the defence out of the hands, 
of the assembly. Danton was now the dictator of Paris, and, with 
the conviction that all means were justifiable to save the country, 
he determined to defend Paris at once against foreign and domestic 
enemies. His avowed policy was to “strike terror into the 
royalists.” The police-committee of the Commune was strength- 
ened by the addition of Marat, the apostle of murder, and other 
members. On the night of the 29th of August the barriers were 
shut, and each house was visited by commissioners under the 
pretext of seeking for arms, but really with the intention of 
discovering the men who were suspected of royalist tendencies. 


528 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP, xxi. 


Three or four thousand priests, nobles, officers, &c., were thrown into 
prison. Even these arbitrary measures did not satisfy the zealous 
champions of popular security. On the night of the 3rd of 
September, after the news had been received of the fall of Verdun, 
the signal was sounded for a new St. Bartholomew. An organised 
band of not more than five or six hundred men visited each of the 
prisons in turn and massacred their inmates. There can be no 
doubt that the butchers acted under the instructions of the 
Commune, and received regular pay for their work. For three 
days the slaughter went on with machine-like regularity. ‘The 
citizens, as if stupefied, made no attempt to stop the horrors; the 
national guard had been disorganised by Santerre; the assembly 
and the ministers were equally powerless. When Roland demanded 
the punishment of the miscreants, the police committee decided to 
arrest him, and it was only Danton’s influence that prevented its 
being done. At least two thousand men perished in the massacre, 
which stopped only when the prisons were empty. A few indi- 
viduals, e.g. Barnave, were saved by Danton. Among the slain 
was the princess of Lamballe, the friend and confidante of the 
queen, whose head was paraded on a pike before the windows of 
the Temple. The committee actually wrote tothe authorities of 
the chief towns to encourage them to similar measures, in order 
that they might “march against the enemy, and leave behind no 
brigands to murder their wives and children.” At Versailles, 
Rheims, Meaux, Lyons and Orleans, the horrible counsel was fol- 
lowed. This was the first result of the triumph of the Gironde 
and of the efforts of foreign powers to restore order in France! 

§ 27. Meanwhile the danger which had served as a pretext for 
these outrages had passed away. Directly after the fall of Verdun 
Dumouriez, assisted by the lethargic movements of the Prussians, 
‘hastened to occupy the passes of the forest of Argonne, “ the 
Thermopylae of France.” Again everything seemed lost, when an 
Austrian detachment under Clairfait carried a neglected pass 
and threatened the French in the rear. But Dumouriez succeeded 
in repairing his error. Leaving Grandpré he occupied a strong 
position at St. Ménéhould, on the south side of the forest, and was 
there joined by Kellermann’s army from Metz. <A Prussian attack 
was ordered against the neighbouring height of Valmy, but it came 
to nothing more than a simple cannonade. The French troops, 
which were beginning to be inspired py the revolutionary spirit, 
showed an unexpected firmness which astounded both the Prussians 
and the emigrants. ‘This slight success decided the campaign, and 
from this moment the invaders began to retreat. Dumouriex had 
saved France. 


a.p. 1792. THE CONVENTION. 529 


By this time the elections to the Convention had taken place. The 
rules prescribed by the constitution were no longer observed. Jivery 
Frenchman over twenty-one years of age was considered an active 
citizen, and every such citizen over twenty-five was eligible as an 
elector or as deputy. No exclusive regulation was any longer in 
force, so that members both of the constituent and of the legislative 
assembly could be chosen. On the 21st of September, the day 
after the cannonade at Valmy, the Convention met, and its first 
uct was to declare that France was no longer 1 monarchy but a 
republic. 


24% 


530 MODERN EUROPE. 


CHAPTER XXIII. 
THE FRENCH REPUBLIC AND THE EUROPEAN COALITION. 


I, ThE NATIONAL CONVENTION AND THE Kina’s DEATH.—§ 1. Parties 
in the Convention. § 2. Quarrels between the Gironde and the Moun- 
tain. § 3. The war; French aggressions in Savoy and Germany. 
§ 4. Conquest of Belgium; ill-treatment of the province. § 5, Trial 
of Louis XVI.; his condemnationanddeath, II, FALLOF THE GIRONDE 
AND REIGN OF TERROR TO ROBESPIERRE’S DEATH.—S 6. Formation of 
the European coalition against France. § 7. Renewal of party conflicts 
in Paris. § 8. Rising in La Vendée; treason of Dumouriez. § 9, 
Attack of the Girondists; popular risings; fall of the Gironde. § 10. 
Provincial revolts; military reverses of the French. § 11. Consti- 
tution of 1793; Committee of Public Safety. § 12. Suppression of 
provincial revolts) § 13. Success of the revolutionary armies. § 14, 
The reign of Terror; introduction of the new Calendar. § 15, The 
Mountain splits into the three parties of Robespierre, Hébert and 
Danton ; Robespierre triumphs over his opponents. § 16, Opposition 
to Robespierre; his fall and death. JI. THERMIDORIAN REACTION 
AND END OF CONVENTION,—§ 17. Reaction against the Terror. § 18, 
French victories in 1794; treaty of Basel, and break-up of the Coalition. 
§ 19. Risings in Paris; royalist expedition to Quiberon. § 20, Con- 
stitution of the Year III.; end of the Convention. IV. Tur Directory. 
—§ 21. Success of the domestic administration of the Directory, 
§ 22. Campaign of 1795 in Germany. § 23. Campaign of 1796; 
Bonaparte in Italy; the Archduke Charles in Germany, § 24. 
Bonaparte invades Austria; preliminaries of Leoben; treacherous 
treatment of Venice. § 25. Coup d'état of the 18th Fructidor. § 26. 
Treaty of Campio Formio. § 27. Bonaparte’s expedition to Egypt. 
§ 28. Second Coalition; French disasters in 1799. § 29. Discontent 
in France; Bonaparte’s return; coup d'état of the 18th Brumaire. 
§ 30. Constitution of the Year VIII. ; establishment of the Consulate. 


I. Tue NatIonNAL CONVENTION AND THE Kina’s DEATH. 


§ 1. Tur Convention contained 749 members, of whom 65 had 
sat in the constituent and 164 in the legislative assembly. The 
deputies had been chosen under the immediate influence of the 
September massacres. In Paris the Commune and its adherents had 
their own way. Robespierre was first deputy, then came Danton, 
Collot d’Herbois, Camille Desmoulins, &c., and finally Marat and 
the duke of Orleans, now Philippe Egalité. But in the provinces 


a 


A.D. 1792. THE CONVENTION. 551 


there was a strong feeling of jealousy against the preponderance of 
the capital, combined with horror at the recent outrages, and at 
most of the elections Girondists were returned. It was charac- 
teristic of the revolution that the extreme party of one assembly 
became the moderates of the next. Not aroyalist or a constitution- 
alist. could be found, and the Girondists occupied the extreme right. 
They were confident in their superior numbers and in their hold on 
the ministry from which Danton had retired on his election as deputy. 
Their old leaders, Vergniaud, Brissot, Condorcet, Guadet, and 
Gensonné, had been re-elected, and were strengthened by several new 
comers. ‘They were determined, by reducing the Commune to obedi- 
ence, to recover the power they had lost since the 2nd of September, 
and also to free the departments from Parisian dictation. On the 
upper benches on the left sat the deputies of Paris with some thirty 
others, and received from their position the name of the Mountain. 
There was little difference of principle between them and the 
Gironde. Both parties were republican, and both had appealed to 
the people to support their measures. But the Girondists wished 
for orderly government, and a reaction from the recent excesses led 
them to distrust the mob, and to incline towards the bourgeois class, 
They had become conservative now that they had secured all that 
they wished. The Mountain, on the other hand, was eager to 
continue the revolution. Their leaders wished to obtain the power 
which the Girondists now held. They were prepared to accept all the 
consequences of the most extreme democracy, and they denounced 
as treason any attempt to thwart the will of the sovereign people. 
Their strength lay in their unity, in the support of the Commune, 
now the first power of the state, and in their ability to call in 
the mob to aid them against the majority. Between the two 
parties were a large number of independent members, known as 
the Plain or the Marsh, who alternately leant to the side of the 
Gironde or the Mountain as they were influenced by convicti n or 
by fear. 

§ 2. The first measures of the Convention were unanimous. They 
legalised a Republic which had existed since the 10th of August, 
and they determined to date the commencement of a new era from 
the 21st of September, which begins the year I. of the Republic. 
As the former constitution had thus ceased to exist, it was decreed 
that all officers should be re-elected, and that all laws should be 
kept that were not expressly repealed, and appointed a committee 
to consider a new constitution. In this, as in all the other com- 
mittees, the Girondists had an overwhelming majority. To secure 
the confiscated wealth, it was ordered that the emigrants should be 
banished for ever, and that if any of them should be found on French 


sy MODERN EUROPE. CHar. xxi 


soil, or be taken with arms in their hands, they should be put to 
death. These measures having been agreed to, the two hostile 
parties came into collision on a report of the ministry about the 
condition of the state. The Girondists denounced the recent 
massacres, demanded the punishment of their authors, and openly 
attacked Danton, Robespierre and Marat, as an ambitious trium- 
virate who aimed at the establishment of a dictatorship. This 
charge was the grand card of the Girondists, but they played it too 
soon and too imprudently. They had no evidence to support it; and 
by making too much of their opponents they helped to bring about 
the very result which they dreaded and denounced. The three 
accused rose in their defence. Danton adroitly turned the tables 
on the Girondists by accusing them of a desire to break France up 
into innumerable republics by making the departments independent 
of the capital. These mutual accusations of a dictatorship and of 
federalism became the chief party-weapons in the Convention. 
Robespierre, as usual, dilated upon his own virtues. When Marat 
appeared at the rostrum, a howl of execration rose from the right 
and centre of the Assembly. Many of the deputies affected to 
believe that such a monster of iniquity never existed, and that his 
writings were the work of a royalist who sought to throw discredit 
on the revolution. Marat exulted in the rage of his adversaries, 
insisted upon speaking, and gloried in the truth of the charge that 
had been brought against him. His cynical audacity raised the idea 
that he was insane, the accusation was dropped, and the Assembly 
proceeded to the order of the day. 

Soon afterwards the Girondists renewed their attack, which was 
this time concentrated against Robespierre, and led by Louvet. 
After obtaining an interval of cight days to prepare his defence, 
Robespierre demolished the flimsy case of his accusers amid the 
applause of his supporters. The Plain evidently regarded these 
accusations as merely personal quarrels, to which no weight was to 
be attached. The conduct of the Gironde was in the highest degree 
injudicious. They made a charge, failed to substantiate it, and let 
it drop. Their attacks served only to give greater prominence and 
popularity to their hated rivals. They decreed the re-election of 
the Commune, but took no steps to prevent the same men from 
returning to power. They alienated Danton, the most moderate 
member of the Mountain, who was willing to prevent the further 
shedding of blood and might easily have been won over from his 
associates. Their ministers were equally incapable and wanting in 
a real policy. The party tended to disintegration, and lost the 
advantage of superior numbers. Only thirty members habitually 
voted tozether, and even they often differed on important measures. 


A.D. 1792. FRENCH AGRESSIONS. 533 


This was a very serious weakness when contrasted with the perfect 
organisation of the Mountain. 

§ 3. Meanwhile the war was still going on, The first check at 
Valmy had decided the campaign of the Prussians in Champagne. 
Their troops were already suffering from disease, and from inclement 
weather. An energetic movement of the French might have anni- 
hilated the invaders, but Dumouriez, who kept an anxious eye upon 
events in Paris, preferred to negotiate. He hoped to gain a great 
triumph for France, by inducing Prussia to desert the coalition and 
to recognise the Republic by a treaty. He knew that the duke of 
Brunswick and most of his soldiers detested the Austrians and the 
emigrants far more than they did the revolution, and that the king 
was eager to have his hands free for the complications in Poland. 
But Frederick William wished for a general not a separate peace, and 
was too chivalrous to desert Austria at the first reverse. ‘The nego- 
tiations were carried on long enough to allow the Prussians an 
undisturbed retreat from French soil and were then broken off. 

This first success inspired the French with a confidence hitherto 
unfelt, and changed the whole character of the war. No longer 
satisfied to defend their frontiers, they determined to spread the 
revolutionary dogmas by force, and to excite a general rising of 
peoples against their kings. ‘The Convention issued a formal in- 
vitation to all discontented subjects to appeal to France for aid. And 
this propaganda was by no means disinterested. ‘The democracy 
was fully as aggressive as the monarchy, and the idea of extending 
France to its ‘natural ” boundaries, so dear to Louis XIV., was 
revived with equal resolution by the republic. Already in Septem- 
ber the army of the south had entered Savoy to punish Victor 
Amadeus III. for his alliance with the house of Bourbon. As the 
dukes of Savoy had extended their territories southwards, and 
become an Italian power as kings of Sardinia, they had lost their 
hold over the French-speaking population of their original duchy. 
The people everywhere welcomed the French, the Piedmont troops 
found resistance to be impossible, and in November both Savoy and 
Nice were formally annexed to I'rance as the departments of Mont 
Blane and the Maritime Alps. Montesquieu was now ordered to 
attack the aristocratic republic of Geneva. ‘The admission of troops 
from Berne was treated as a breach of former treaties and a pretext 
for hostilities. But Montesquieu, a marquis under the old régime, 
was by no means prepared to accept the revolutionary interpretation 
of the law of nations, and opened negotiations with the besieged 
city. For this act of disobedience he was formally accused before 
the Convention and had to seek safety in Switzerland. Geneva was 
spared for the moment. 

These successes in the south were speedily surpassed by those in 


534 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. XxuI, 


Germany. The constitution of the Empire was as hopelessly divided 
and impotent asever. Nowhere was the general disintegration more 
conspicuous than in the “ Priest’s Road,” the chain of ecclesiastical 
states along the Rhine valley. The advance of the Prussians into 
France left these states defenceless, and in September a French 
detachment under Custine advanced to the attack. He was an 
enthusiastic partisan of the revolution, and his watchword was “ war 
to the palaces and peace to the cottages.” Speier and Worms fell 
into his hands, and the princes of the neighbouring states fled in 
reckless haste before an incapable general and a handful of recruits. 
Nothing more disgraceful to Germany had been experienced since 
the Hussite wars. Mainz, the chief city of western Germany, 
surrendered without striking a blow (21 Oct.), and Frankfort for 
a short time was occupied by the French. 

§ 4. Dumouriez in the meantime was no less active in the north. 
Leaving Kellermann to pursue the Prussians, he induced the 
ministry to approve his favourite scheme of an invasion of Belgium. 
Everything seemed to mark out Belgium as an easy prey for the 
French. ‘lhe government of Joseph II. had- provoked a revolt 
against Hapsburg rule, which had been put down by Leopold without 
any cessation of discontent. ‘The provinces were still only loosely 
bound together, and there was no force to defend them, except 
some 20,000 Austrian troops under the divided command of Clairfait 
and the duke of Saxe-Teschen, who had already failed in an attack 
upon Vauban’s great fortress, Lille. Circumstances were very favour- 
able for the dashing tactics of Dumouriez. <A single victory at Jem- 
mappes (6 Nov.), the first pitched battle of the war, decided the 
campaign. ‘lhe Austrians retired and Dumouriez advanced as far 
as Aix-la-Chapelle. Everywhere the people welcomed the French 
as deliverers, and it seemed probable that Holland, equally weakened 
by party divisions, would prove as easy a conquest. 

The Convention was eager to reap the fruits of these great suc- 
cesses: In defiance of treaties which France had guaranteed over 
and over again, it ordered the opening of the Scheldt, and declared 
Antwerp a free port (6 Nov.). A decree of the 15th of December 
went still further in its avowed hostility to the powers. of Europe: 
‘In every country that shall be occupied by French armies, the 
generals shall announce the abolition of all existing authorities: of 
nobility, serfdom, of all feudal rights and all monopolies. 'They shall 
proclaim the sovereignty of the people, and convoke assemblies of 
the inhabitants to form a provisional government, to which no 
officer of a former government, no noble, and no member of a 
privileged corporation shall be eligible. ‘They shall appropriate 
for the French Republic all property belonging to the sovereign and 
his adherents or to any civil and religious corporation: The French 


A.D. 1792. THE CONVENTION. 535 


nation will treat as enemies any people which, refusing liberty and 
equality, desires to preserve its prince and privileged classes or to 
make any accommodation.” It is evident that the Convention looked 
to the liberated and conquered peoples to defray the expenses of the 
war. The first attempt to put these peculiar principles into force 
was made in Belgium, where it sensibly cooled the ardour of the 
people for their French deliverers. A number of commissioners, 
with Danton at their head, were despatched to establish a republican 
government in a province which was treated as if it had been con- 
quered. Their reckless confiscations, and especially their attacks 
upon the monasteries and the clergy, aroused the greatest indignation 
among a people which was then, as now, the most religious in Europe. 
No one was more indignant than Dumouriez himself, who aspired 
to establish a protectorate in Belgium, and who saw all the fruits of 
his victory snatched from him by the rapacious envoys of the 
Jacobin Club. Unable to protect the people from oppression, he 
returned to Paris, where he found that events had taken a new and 
most unwelcome turn. 

§ 5. The party conflicts in the Convention went on with ever- 
increasing bitterness, and at last the Mountain discovered a new 
means of discrediting their opponents and securing their own 
supremacy. They demanded that the king should be brought to 
justice as an enemy of the nation. ‘hey saw in his death a perma- 
nent rupture with the past bistory of France, and they hoped to crush 
the Girondists, if they tried to defend him, under a charge of 
royalism. ‘I'he Jacobin club organised a series of petitions in which 
the death of the king was demanded in terms of revolting barbarity. 
The more moderate deputies pointed to the constitution of 1791, 
which decreed the personal inviolability of the monarch, and imposed 
in certain cases the penalty of deposition. This penalty had been 
already inflicted, and neither the Convention nor any other body 
could proceed further. Finally, the question was entrusted to a 
committee, which reported that the king could lawfully be tried 
by the Convention. On this report a great debate was commenced 
on the 13th of November. The Gironde, imperfectly apprehending 
the tactics of their enemies, still wished to maintain the constitution, 
while the Plain inclined to adopt the report. But St. Just and 
Robespierre, who on this point assumed the lead of the Mountain, 
took a much bolder, and from their point of view a more manly, line. 
They maintained that the assembly was composed of statesmen, not 
of judges, that the king’s guilt had already been decided by his 
deposition, that a dethroned king was dangerous to a republic, and 
that the letter of the constitution could not prohibit a measure 
which was necessary for the public safety. They demanded the 
king’s death at once and without trial, by the sacred right of revolu- 


536 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. xxmmt. 


tion. These extreme proposals, which appealed to the passions and 
the fears of the multitude, forced the hand of the opposition. The 
Girondists, fearing the loss of their popularity if they appeared as 
advocates for the king, joined the Plain and voted for his trial before 
the Convention, which was decreed on the 2nd of December. Before 
this, the discovery of a secret cupboard in the Tuileries had 
brought to light all the papers of the king, his correspondence with 
Mirabeau and Bouillé, and all the schemes that had been enter- 
tained for lis release or his restoration to power. ‘These papers 
were the chief basis of the formal accusation that was drawn up 
against him. 

Ever since the 11th of August Louis XVI. had been a close 
prisorer in the Temple, and in October he had undergone the further 
punishment of being separated from his family. Never had his 
character appeared so admirable as during this period of trouble. The 
irresolution which had been so fatal a quality had entirely disap- 
peared when all responsibility of government was removed. On the 
13th of December he appeared at the bar of the Convention, and 
made no attempt to deny the authority of those who were at once 
his accusers and judges. Barére, the president, read the charges 
and asked the questions that had been previously agreed upon. 
Louis replied quietly and firmly, declared his ministers responsible 
for his public acts, and denied the authenticity of the concealed 
documents. The only accusation that moved him was that of 
having shed the blood of the citizens on the 10th of August. On 
his withdrawal a stormy debate followed, and the hostile factions 
nearly came to blows. In spite of the opposition of the Mountain, 
it was decided to accept the king’s demand that counsel should be 
heard in his defence. He chose Target, who refused, and Tronchet. 
At this crisis Malesherbes, the most virtuous of French ministers, 
came forward to offer his services to the king under whom he had 
held office. Louis XVI. was profoundly touched by this proof of 
a devotion which even the Convention could not fail to appreciate. 
On the 26th of December the defence, which had been prepared with 
enormous labour, was pronounced by Deséze, an advocate who had 
been associated with Malesherbes and Tronchet. His speech was a 
masterpiece of temperate and convincing reasoning, and if it lacked 
the highest qualities of eloquence, it was because the king himself 
refused to stoop to an appeal for mercy to his judges. The debate 
in the Convention was resumed on the next day. The Girondists, 
whose conduct throughout shows their weakness as a party, were 
anxious to save the king, but dared not pronounce openly for his 
acquittal. ‘They proposed a formal appeal to the people, which 
gratified their republican predilections, and would at the same time 
remove the responsibility from their own shoulders, But the 


A.D. 1792-17938. EXECUTION OF LOUIS XVI. ay! 


Jacobins became more imperative as their triumph seemed assured. 
They filled the galleries with their turbulent adherents, who 
threatened with death those deputies who endeavoured to save the 
accused prince. At last the debate was closed on the 14th of 
January, 1793, and three questions were formally proposed to the 
assembly. (1) Is Louis Capet guilty? (2) Should an appeal to 
the people be allowed? (8) What punishment should be inflicted ? 
The first question was answered in the affirmative almost with 
unanimity, and the appeal was rejected by 484 votes to 292. 
Lanjuinais then proposed that three-fourths of the votes should be 
necessary for condemnation, but Danton carried his motion that a 
simple majority should settle the matter. On the third question 
votes were given orally by each member in turn, and as several took 
the opportunity to explain their motives, the process lasted for 
twenty-five hours. All the machinery of terrorism was put into 
working to influence the irresolute Girondists, and with fatal success. 
Vergniaud, the most eloquent advocate of justice and mercy in the 
preceding debates, was now president of the Convention, and voted 
for ‘death to avoid a civil war,” and his example decided many of 
those who were still wavering. Philip of Orleans, amidst general 
execration, voted for the execution of the head of his family. 
Finally, Vergniaud rose to declare the result in a trembling voice. 
721 deputies voted, so that 361 were necessary to form a majority. 
366 voted for death absolutely, and 67 for the same punishment 
with various conditions; 286 were in favour of imprisonment or 
exile ; and two voted for the galleys. ‘The Girondists made a last 
effort to get the sentence reprieved for a time, but they were de- 
feated by 34 votes. On the 20th of January, Louis XVI. was 
allowed a final and agonising interview with his family; on the 
next day he met his death with heroic fortitude in what is now the 
Place de la Concorde. The character of Louis has been admirably 
summed up by Mignet, the most phlegmatic of the republican 
historians. ‘* He was the best but the feeblest of kings. His an- 
cestors bequeathed to him a revolution. He was more fitted than 
any of them to prevent or to terminate it ; for he was capable of 
being a reforming king before it broke out, or of acting as a con- 
stitutional king afterwards. He is perhaps the only prince who 
had no passions, not even that of power, and who united the two 
essential qualities of a good king, fear of God and love of the people. 
He perished the victim of passions which he did not share: of those 
of his adherents to which he was a stranger, and of those of the 
multitude which he had not excited. History will say of him that, 
with a little more force of character, he would have been a unique 
ruler.” 


5388 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP, xximt, 


Il. FALL oF THE GrronpE. RecN oF TERRoR. DeatTH 
or ROoBESPIERRE. 


§ 6. By the execution of Louis XVI. the revolution broke down 
all the bridges behind it, and at the same time bade defiance 
to the monarchical states of Europe. The immediate result 
was the increase of enemies both without and within. England 
had been studiously neutral until its own interests were touched 
by the threatened annexation of Belgium and the opening of the 
Scheldt. From that moment Pitt determined on a war against 
the “armed opinions” which defied the obligations of treaties and the 
public law of Europe. He had been already strengthened by the 
secession of Burke from the Whigs, and the king’s death, which 
stirred popular opinion to its depths, removed all obstacles in the 
way of an active policy. Chauvelin, the French envoy in London, 
was dismissed, and the Convention, eagerly accepting what was in- 
evitable, declared war against Great Britain on the 8th of February, 
1793. The accession of England was speedily followed by the 
completion of the anti-revolutionary coalition. Holland, as usual, 
followed in the footsteps of its powerful neighbour. Spain, where 
the liberal d’Aranda had been supplanted in the ministry by Charles 
IV.’s incapable favourite, Godoi, was involved in the war in March ; 
Portugal, the Papal States, and Naples joined the alliance. Russia 
exulted in circumstances which left her free to act in Poland. The 
only neutral states were Switzerland, Denmark, Sweden, Venice, 
and Turkey. 

§ 7. These external dangers caused a momentary cessation of 
party conflicts in the Convention. A levy of 300,000 men was 
decreed; the incapable Pache was removed from the ministry of 
war and replaced by Beurnonville; 800 millions of asstgnats were 
issued ; and the numbers of the national guard were nearly doubled. 
But the truce was only momentary. ‘lhe Girondists had consented 
to the king’s death in order to save themselves, but they were not 
destined to receive the expected reward of their dishonour. Roland, 
who had contributed directly to bring about the fate of Louis XVL., 
resigned office immediately afterwards. His associates found them- 
selves confronted by the implacable hostility of the Mountain and of 
the Commune. Pache was consoled for his dismissal by being elected 
mayor of Paris, but his influence was small compared with that of 
his subordinates, Chaumette and Iébert. Marat and Robespierre 
were determined to rid themselves of opponents who stood in the 
way of their designs, and urged the mob to violent measures against 
the traitors who had endeavoured to save the tyrant. Danton alone 
of the Jacobins was inclined to moderate courses. He had formed in 


A.D. 17938. DUMOURIEZ. 539 


Belgium a connection with Dumouriez, and was quite willing to come 
to terms with the Gironde. But the influence of Madame Roland 
and Guadet was too strong to allow of an alliance with the author 
of the massacres of September, and Danton was forced by the 
instinct of self-preservation to support the associates whom he was 
anxious to desert. This was a fatal error on the part of the 
Girondists, who tried in vain to absorb the attention of the assembly 
in the scheme of a new constitution which had been drawn up by 
Condorcet. Party feeling was too inflamed for an abstract debate, 
and before long external events came to the assistance of the 
Jacobins. 

§ 8. The levy of 300,000 men provoked a rising in the province of 
La Vendée, where the ancient régime survived in its entirety, and 
where the priests and nobles had lost none of their influence over 
the virtuous and ignorant peasantry. Able and courageous leaders 
were found in Chatelineau, Stofflet, Charette, d’Elbée and La 
Rochejaquelin, and for a long time they were able to foil all the 
attempts that were made to put down the rebellion. Danger 
always tended to increase the fanaticism of the capital, and at this 
time domestic revolt was rendered more serious by successes of the 
foreign enemies of France. ‘The Austrians and Prussians had 
determined on great exertions to recover Belgium and Mainz, which 
had been lost in 1792. Dumouriez, who had failed in the objects of 
his journey to Paris, returned to the army with orders to attempt the 
reduction of Holland. Ordering one detachment under Valence to 
watch the Austrians, and another under Miranda to take Maestricht 
and then to join him at Utrecht, he crossed the frontier and took 
Breda and Gertruydenberg. He was recalled by the news that the 
Austrian commander, the Prince of Coburg, had entered Belgium, 
driven Valence back to Louvain, and forced Miranda to raise the 
siege of Maestricht. Hurrying back, Dumouriez risked an engage- 
ment at Neerwinden (18 March) and was defeated. This check 
decided him to put into immediate execution a plan which he had 
entertained ever since the death of Louis XVI. This was nothing 
less than to put down the revolution in Paris, to restore the con- 
stitution of 1791, and to give the crown to the young son of Orleans, 
Louis Philippe, duke of Chartres, who was at the time serving in 
his army. He had intended to carry out this programme with all 
the prestige of a great conqueror, but, as this was now impossible, 
he determined to appeal to the enemies of France. ‘The matter 
was arranged in negotiations with the Austrian general Mack, and 
Dumouriez made no secrecy of his intentions to the envoys whom 
the Convention had dispatched on the first news of his treachery. 
He tried to -obtain possession of Lille and Valenciennes, but the 


540 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. XXII. 


gates were closed against him. Like Lafayette under similar cir- 
cumstances, he discovered that the soldiers, hitherto devoted to him, 
preferred their country to their general, and were by no means so 
dissatisfied with the revolution as to consent to a foreign invasion 
of France. Dumouriez, foiled on every side, fled to the Austrians, 
and after twenty years of inglorious exile died in London. The 
command of his army was entrusted to Dampierre. 

§ 9. The news of Dumouriez’ treachery gave new vigour to the 
attack upon the party of the Gironde, with which he had formerly 
identified himself. In order to purge themselves of suspicion, the 
Girondists accused Danton of complicity with the general, whose 
acquaintance he had made in Belgium, but the only result was to 
make an irreconcilable enemy of the most pacific of the dema- 
gogues. The general terror enabled the Mountain to carry the 
most extreme measures. The duke of Orleans and all Bourbons 
were exiled, the non-juring priests were everywhere persecuted, all 
the remaining property of the emigrants was confiscated, and the 
revolutionary tribunal commenced its activity. On the 6th of April 
a Committee of Public Safety, consisting of nine members, renew- 
able every month, was appointed with dictatorial power. Marat, as 
head of the Jacobin club, got up popular petitions which demanded 
the arrest of twenty-two Girondists. This attack upon the privi- 
leges of deputies produced a momentary alliance between the right 
and centre of the Convention. Marat was formally accused, but was 
acquitted by the revolutionary tribunal, and returned to his seat 
amidst the applause of the mob. Every day the popular passion 
increased in vehemence, and the Convention, which on the 10th of 
May began to sit in the Tuileries, saw itself threatened by an 
armed force. Guadet proposed to annul the existing authorities in 
the city, but his party could never agree upon active measures, and 
Barére was able to carry, as a compromise, the appointment of a 
commission of twelve to enquire into the relations between the 
Convention and the Commune. The Twelve commenced their work 
with great vigour, and ordered the arrest of Hébert, one of the mest 
active promoters of disorder. The result was a popular rising, which 
compelled the Convention to decree the release of Hébert and the 
suppression of the Twelve. On the next day the Girondists 
recovered their supremacy and the Twelve were restored. But the 
mob had felt their power and were not inclined to submit to defeat. 
On the 31st of May, a regular insurrection was planned and carried 
out, under the leadership of Henriot, who now succeeded Santerre 
as commander of the national guard. Robespierre wished to direct 
the popular fury against the leaders of the Gironde, but the real 
object of the rising was the suppression of the Twelve, and it sub- 


A.D. 1793. FALL OF THE GIRONDISTS. 541 


sided when this was decreed for the second time. Danton was 
satisfied with the fall of a commission which threatened to extend 
its enquiries back to the preceding September, but his associates 
were determined to secure a decisive victory. On the 2nd of June, 
80,000 men, with Henriot at their head, besieged the Tuileries and 
demanded the arrest of the Twelve and of the chief Girondists. 
Barére proposed that the accused deputies should suspend them- 
selves from their functions, and several yielded in the vain hope of 
appeasing their enemies. But meanwhile the undisguised dictation 
of the mob had irritated those members of the Mountain, who 
regarded the national assembly as inviolable. The Convention 
advanced in a body. to the entrance and ordered their besiegers 
to withdraw. Henriot’s answer was to point his cannon at the 
deputies, who returned in dismayed consciousness of their impo- 
tence. Marat, who revelled in the success of the intimidation, drew 
up the list of the proscribed, and the imprisonment was decreed 
of the twelve members of the commission and twenty-two of the 
Girondist leaders, including Vergniaud, Guadet, Gensonné, Brissot, 
Pétion, Lanjuinais, etc. 

§ 10. The fall of the Gironde was a great triumph for the 
Mountain, but it only added to the dangers which threatened 
France. Most of the imprisoned deputies escaped, and raised the 
standard of revolt in Caen. More than fifty departments rallied to 
their side and declared against the tyrannical supremacy of Paris. 
The spirit of the opposition is manifested in the conduct of 
Charlotte Corday, who journeyed alone to Paris in order to avenge 
the Gironde by the murder of Marat (138 July). She herself 
perished on the scaffold, and divine honours were paid to her 
victim. The flames of civil war extended in every direction. In 
the south, Lyons, Marseilles, Toulon, Nismes and a number of 
other towns declared against the Convention. In the north the 
province of Calvados took up arms for the monarchy. The armies 
of La Vendée, no longer content with escaping conquest, took the 
aggressive and attacked Nantes, in order to make themselves 
masters of the Loire and to open a connection with England. But 
all these movements were paralysed by want of union. The 
Girondists had no sympathy with the royalists, who sought to 
direct a rebellion which they could never have originated. And 
internal discord only strengthened the hands of the foreign invaders 
of France, who now made it their chief object, not to put down the 
revolution, but to make conquests for themselves. The English 
and Austrians took Condé and Valenciennes and once more opened 
the route to Paris. The successes of Custine in Germany had 
already been reversed, and Mainz, which alone offered any resistance, 


542 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. XxIm. 


was recovered by the Prussians on the 22nd of July. The 
Spaniards defeated the French troops in the Pyrenees, and 20,000 
Piedmontese invaded France on the side of the Alps. The capital 
was threatened with famine, and, to make matters worse, the Eng- 
lish Government declared all French ports in a state of blockade. 

§ 11. It was while affairs were in this critical condition that the 
Mountain undertook the sole conduct of government in France. 
They had hitherto resisted all attempts of the Girondists to 
establish a new constitution in place of that of 1791. They now 
undertook the work themselves, and in four days drew up a 
constitution, as simple as it was democratic, which was issued on 
the 24th of June. Every citizen of the age of twenty-one could 
vote directly in the election of deputies, who were chosen for a 
year at a time, and were to sit in a single assembly. The 
assembly had the sole power of making laws, but a period was 
fixed during which the constituents could protest against its 
enactments. The executive power was entrusted to twenty-four 
men, who were chosen by the assembly from candidates nominated 
by electors chosen by the original voters. ‘Twelve out of the 
twenty-four were to be renewed every six months. But this con- 
stitution was intended merely to satisfy the departments, and was 
never put into practice. The condition of France required a 
greater concentration of power, and this was supplied by the 
Committee of Public Safety. Ever since the 6th of April the 
original members of the Committee had been re-elected, but on the 
10th of July its composition was changed. Danton ceased to be a 
member, and Barére was joined by Robespierre, St. Just, Couthon, 
Billaud-Varennes, Collot d’Herbois, and, in a short time, Carnot. 
These men became the absolute rulers of France. 

The Committee had no difficulty in carrying their measures in 
the Convention, from which the opposition party had disappeared. 
All the state obligations were rendered uniform and inscribed in 
“the great book of the national debt.” The treasury was filled by 
a compulsory loan from the rich. Every income between 1000 
and 10,000 francs had to pay ten per cent., and every excess over 
10,000 francs had to be contributed in its entirety for one year. 
To recruit the army a levée en masse was decreed. “The young 
men shall go to war; the married men shall forge arms and 
transport supplies; the wives shall make tents and clothes and 
serve in the hospitals; the children shall tear old linen into lint; 
the aged shall resort to the public places to excite the courage of 
the warriors and hatred against kings.” Nor were measures 
neglected against domestic enemies. On the 6th of September a 
revolutionary army, consisting of 6000 men and 1200 artillerymen, 


A.D. 1793. INTERNAL REVOLTS. 543 


was placed at the disposal of the Committee to carry out its orders 
throughout France. On the 17th the famous “law of the 
suspects ” was carried. Under the term “suspects” were included 
all those who by words, acts or writings had shown themselves in 
favour of monarchy or of federalism, the relatives of the emigrants, 
etc., and they were to be imprisoned until the peace. As the 
people were in danger of famine, a maximum price, already 
established for corn, was decreed for all necessaries; if a merchant 
gave up his trade he became a suspect, and the hoarding of provisions 
was punished by death. On the 10th of October the Convention 
definitely transferred its powers to the Committee, by subjecting 
all officials to its authority and by postponing the trial of the new 
constitution until the peace. 

§ 12. Even before the central government had been strengthened 
by these decrees, great progress had been made in the suppression 
of internal rebellions. The movement in the north was the first to 
succumb. The royalist general, Wimpfen, was defeated on the 
15th of July, and on the 8rd of August the commissioners of the 
Convention entered Caen, which was treated with unusual clemency. 
Soon afterwards Bordeaux, the centre of opposition in the west, 
tendered its submission and accepted the constitution. In the 
south the republican forces carried all before them. Marseilles was 
taken on the 28rd of August, and Toulon only saved itself for a 
time by calling to its assistance the English admiral, Hood; in 
December it had to surrender to the genius of Napoleon Bonaparte. 
Lyons, the most formidable opponent of the capital, was besieged 
from August till October, and when it was finally captured the 
Convention decreed its utter destruction and the erection on its site 
of a pillar with the inscription, “ Lyons made war against freedom, 
Lyons is no more.” The people. of La Vendée, in spite of their 
heroism, were doomed to the same fate. The attack upon Nantes 
had failed and their leader Chatelineau had fallen. The province 
was now invaded, and the garrison of Mainz, bound by its capitula- 
tion not to serve against the foreign enemy, was transferred to this 
scene of warfare. The Vendeans were no match for regular troops, 
and after they had experienced four successive defeats, more than 
80,000 of them attempted to escape into Brittany. The attempt 
was repulsed, and a scattered remnant of this large force was driven 
to return homewards. The Committee of Public Safety decided to 
exterminate a population which it was impossible to pacify, and the 
province was given up to a military execution. By the end of 
1793 almost the whole of France had submitted, and the 
revolutionary commissioners were as absolute in the departments 
as the Committee of Public Safety was in Paris. 


544 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. XXII. 


§ 13. Almost equally successful was the conduct of the war with 
the foreigners, and here, too, fortune favoured the French. Just 
as the internal revolts were weakened by the discord between 
Girondists and royalists, so the efforts of the allies were paralysed 
by the ill-feeling that arose between Austria and Prussia about the 
second partition of Poland. It was this which prevented the 
Prussians from advancing after the capture of Mainz, and thus lost 
the favourable moment for an advance upon Paris. At the same 
time the open substitution of a policy of territorial aggrandisement 
for the disinterested motives which had been professed at the out- 
break of the war, alienated from the coalition all those classes 
among the French who might otherwise have sympathised with 
them. The victory of the democracy in Paris reacted upon the 
military administration. Carnot, a man of great organising 
genius, undertook the control of the war. The old aristocratic 
generals, such as Custine and Montesquieu, were replaced by men 
who had risen from the ranks, like Jourdan, Hoche and Pichegru. 
Thus was restored that unanimity between the commanders and 
the central government which had given the French their great 
successes at the end of 1792, and the interruption of which had led 
to the subsequent disasters. 

After the capture of Condé and Valenciennes the English and 
Austrians, instead of continuing their advance, separated to secure 
their own selfish interests. The prince of Coburg attacked and 
took Quesnoy, and the duke of York laid siege to Dunkirk, an old 
object of greed to England. Houchard, who had succeeded Custine 
in the command of the northern army, was ordered to attack the 
English, and by a slight success at Hondscoote he forced York to 
raise the siege of Dunkirk (6 Sept.), As Houchard’s conduct was 
considered unsatisfactory, Carnot replaced him by Jourdan, who 
defeated the Austrians at Wattignies (16 Oct.). The prince of 
Coburg retired behind the Sambre, and effected a junction with the 
English, while the French went into winter quarters. Meanwhile, 
another Austrian army under Wiirmser had invaded Alsace in con- 
junction with the Prussians under Prunswick, forced the lines of 
Weissemburg, and almost succeeded in taking Strasburg. But the 
jealousy between the two commanders and between their respective 
armies ruined an undertaking which had been so successfully 
undertaken. The French, led by Hoche and Pichegru, and 
inspired by the presence of St. Just as commissioner of the 
Convention, took the aggressive, recovered the lines of Weissemburg, 
and forced the invaders to retire upon the Rhine. 

§ 14. These successes were glorious to France, but they were 
sullied by the terrible measures which the victorious party thought 


A.D. 1793. THE REIGN OF TERROR. 545 


itself justified in taking against domestic enemies. The “reign of 
terror” was inaugurated in Paris with the same_ sophistical 
professions of virtue that had been employed to justify religious 
persecutions in past ages. The prisons were crammed with more 
than 5000 suspects, arrested under the decree of the 17th of 
September. The revolutionary tribunal, hitherto almost inactive, 
now commenced its bloodthirsty functions. The first victim was 
Custine, accused of treachery in the surrender of Mainz and 
Valenciennes. Marie Antoinette followed her husband to the 
scaffold with not inferior courage on the 16th of October. The 
imprisoned Girondists, with Vergniaud at their head, shared the 
same fate. Many of their associates who had escaped, Roland, 
Pétion, and Buzot, evaded the vengeance of their implacable 
enemies by suicide. Philip of Orleans, Madame Roland, Bailly, 
Barnave, Houchard, and a number of other men scarcely less 
distinguished, perished by the guillotine. Among the almost 
innumerable victims of the terror was the famous Madame 
Dubarry, once the all-powerful mistress of Louis XV. In Lyons, 
Toulon, and above all at Nantes, the same horrors were repeated 
with even less pretence of judicial forms. 

In order to complete the separation from the past a new 
calendar was introduced on the 6th of October. The year, which 
began on the 22nd of September, was divided into twelve equal 
months: vendémiaire, brumaire, frimaire, for the autumn ; nivose, 
pluviose, ventose, for winter; germinal, floréal, prairial, for spring ; 
messidor, thermidor, fructidor, for summer. Each month con- 
tained three decades, and the ten days of each were named after 
their numerical order: primidi, duodi, tridi, quartidi, quintidt, 
sextidi, septidi, octidi, nonidi, decadi. Every tenth day was to be 
a day of rest. Five supplementary days were added at the end of 
the year, called sans-culotides, and dedicated respectively to Genius, 
to Labour, to Actions, to Recompenses, and to Opinion. The 
abolition of the Christian calendar, and with it of the old Sundays 
and festivals, naturally led to an attack upon Christianity itself. 
But in this we see the first trace of divisions in the party which 
had hitherto carried everything before it by united and unscrupu- 
lous action. 

§ 15. For some time the Mountain had been tending to split 
into three distinct divisions, representing the views of its original 
leaders—Danton, Robespierre, and Marat. Danton’s party had 
justified the employment of terror by the necessity of saving the 
country ; but, now that this object had been attained, they wished 
to return to a more merciful policy. They were nicknamed the 
* moderates,” and their views were powerfully expressed in Le 

25 


‘B46 MODERN EUROPE. CuAP, XXII. 


Vieux Cordelier of Camille Desmoulins. They were supported by 
the vast majority of the bourgeois class, but since Danton’s retire- 
ment they had lost all hold upon the government, and they were 
discredited by the looseness and luxury of their private life. ‘The 
party of Marat had been deprived of its real leader by the act of 
Charlotte Corday, but it had a number of prominent representatives, 
and it was all-powerful in the Commune. ‘“Chaumette and _ his 
substitute Hébert were its political chiefs; Ronsin, commander of 
the revolutionary army, its general; the atheist, Anacharsis Clootz, 
its apostle.” ‘The club of the Cordeliers, from which the Dantonists 
had been excluded, was entirely composed of its partisans. These 
men, known as the exagerés or Hébertists, gloried in the worst 
excesses of the revolution, and wished to destroy all religion in 
France. Their opinions were shamelessly expressed in the in- 
famous paper, Pére Duchéne, of which Hébert was the proprietor 
and editor. They took the lead in the destruction of the royal 
tombs at St. Denis, and they forced the Convention to decree the 
abolition of the Catholic faith and to adopt the religion of freedom 
and equality. On the 10th of November they celebrated the 
famous “feast of reason” in Notre Dame, where the goddess was 
represented by a prostitute. ‘These obscene rites excited the out- 
spoken disgust of Robespierre, who was a sincere believer in the 
deism which he had extracted from the writings of Rousseau, and 
who adopted Voltaire’s phrase that “if God did not exist it would 
be necessary to invent Him.”  Robespierre occupies a middle 
position between the indulgents on the one side, and the extreme 
party on the other. He was still master of the Jacobin club and 
its affiliated societies, and with his allies, St. Just, Couthon, Billaud- 
Varennes, and Collot d’Herbois, he could command a secure majo- 
rity in the Committee of Public Safety. The Committee was now 
definitely opposed to the Commune, and determined to crush its 
rival by the destruction of the Hébertists. At the same time 
-Robespierre would have nothing to do with Danton and _ his 
-adherents, who made vigorous efforts to draw him over to their 
side. He resolved on the destruction of the two parties which 
threatened to ruin the republic, the one by their anarchical excesses, 
the other by their ill-timed levity ; and he pursued his aim with a 
combination of obstinacy and dissimulation which. excited the 
admiration of his foliowers and the bitter wrath of his deceived 
opponents. He first allied himself with the Dantonists, and on the 
15th of March, Hébert, Chaumette, Anacharsis Clootz, Ronsin and 
others were arrested and soon afterwards executed. A universal 
feeling of relief spread through Paris and France at the punishment 
of these ruffians, but it was speedily dissipated-cn the 30th of 


A.D. 1798-1794. - ROBESPIERRE. ‘547 


March, when Danton, Camille Desmoulins, and several of their 
associates were also conducted to prison. The accusation was 
managed by St. Just, but it broke down beneath the invectives of 
Danton, who pointed triumphantly to his past conduct, denounced 
the treachery of his accusers, and defeated all the efforts that were 
made to silence him. So great was the impression made by his 
defence, that the Convention was forced to decree the termination - 
of the trial, and the accused were condemned with revolutionary 
promptness. On the 5th of April the Dantonists, fifteen in number, 
were led to the scaffold, and met their fate with a resolution worthy 
of a better cause. A few days later the last remnants of the two | 
defeated parties, including the widows of Hébert and of Desmoulins, 
were got rid of in the same way. 

Robespierre was now at the height of his power, the Committee 
of Public Safety was as yet undivided, the Commune, in which 
Fleuriot had succeeded Pache, was.devoted to him, and the Con- 
vention did not dare to question his will. The reign of terror was 
continued with increased severity. Nearly 600 victims perished 
between March and June, and among them were Louis XVI.’s 
sister Elizabeth, the virtuous Malesherbes and his family, and a 
number of men who had played an active part in the constituent and 
legislative assemblies. Carrier at Nantes, and Joseph Lebon at Arras, 
even surpassed the cruelties of the capital. At the same time Robes- 
pierre took steps to revive religion in France under new forms. 
On the 7th of May, he carried a decree by which the Convention 
formally recognised the existence of a supreme being and the 
immortality of the soul. A month later he presided, with almost 
pontifical dignity, over the “festival of the supreme being,” which 
was intended to drive from men’s minds all recollection of the 
orgies of the feast of reason. 

§ 16. But before long the unity of the Spite yer y government 
was destroyed by the rise of new parties. On the one hand were 
the most bloodthirsty of the leaders, Billaud-Varennes and Collot 
dHerbois, who were jealous of the ascendancy of Robespierre, and 
were. anxious to carry the terror to extremes from which even-he 
shrank. They were joined by Barére, whose command of feeble 
‘epigrams gave him undeserved prominence, and who was im- 
pelled by cowardice to desert any cause that seemed to be failing. 
As compared with these men, Robespierre and his immediate 
associates, Couthon and St. Just, were moral and moderate. They 
had at last begun to perceive an end of the revolution in their 
own dictatorship and the adoption of their sentimental deism, by 
the people.. ‘The terror was to end when they had inaugurated the 
“reign of virtue.’ _Robespierre went so far,as’ to demand, the 


548 MODERN EUROPE. ‘CHAP. XXIII. 


recall of the infamous Carrier, and to oppose the action. of the 
Comité de streté générale, which directed the administration of 
justice and police. ‘The real moderates of the Committee of Public 
Safety were the men like Carnot, who belonged to no party, and 
devoted themselves to the executive business that devolved on 
them. 

' The opposition to Robespierre was formed by the union of the 
extreme adherents of Billaud and Collot with the remnants of 
Danton’s party and all who were revolted by the cruelty of the 
existing system. Indignant at the slightest resistance to his will, 
Robespierre determined to continue the terror until all his enemies 
had been destroyed, and proposed to the Convention the infamous 
law of the 22nd Prairial (10 June). ‘The revolutionary tribunal 
was to be divided into four sections in order to increase its activity, 
the only penalty that it could impose was death, and no proof of 
guilt was required except a “moral” conviction of the jurors. 
Hitherto no deputy could be brought to trial except by decree of 
the Convention, now all that was required was an order of the 
Committee. The measure was received with terrified horror, but 
Robespierre’s personal ascendancy was still so great that it was 
carried. But from this time the opposition could not rest until it 
had secured its safety by the overthrow of the tyrant. An attack 
was made upon Catharine Théot, an old woman who was accused 
of founding a sect for the worship of Robespierre as a new Messiah ; 
and the latter was so chagrined that he retired from public life for 
a fortnight. This was a fatal error at a moment when energetic 
action would have foiled all the plans of his enemies. St. Just 
vainly urged him to act with daring. The fact was, that Robes- 
pierre had hitherto taken advantage of movements originated by 
others, and never organised a coup @’état of his own accord. To 
the last minute he believed that his personal influence would over- 
awe opposition, and that the employment of force would be un- 
necessary. The Commune was now his chief stronghold, but no 
actual preparations had been made when the final attack was made 
by his enemies in the Convention on the 9th Thermidor (27 
July). After a stormy debate, in which Robespierre vainly strove 
to obtain a hearing, his arrest was decreed, together with that of 
Couthon and St. Just. Lebas and Robespierre’s younger brother 
shared the same fate on their own demand. 

Meanwhile the leaders of the Commune, Fleuriot, Payan, and 
Henriot, were assembled in the Hétel de Ville.. On the news that 
the triumvirs were arrested, they at once gave the signal for a 
general insurrection. Henriot, as he made the round of the 
streets to call the people to arms, was seized by two members of 


A.D. 1794. DEATH OF ROBESPIERRE. 549 


the Convention. But this reverse was only temporary. The 
agents of the Commune succeeded in releasing not only Henriot but 
Robespierre and his fellow-prisoners, who arrived in triumph at the 
Hotel de Ville. It was a critical moment for the Convention when 
Henriot, resuming the command of the troops, induced them to 
turn their cannon upon the Tuileries. But the gunners refused to 
fire, and the deputies were encouraged to declare their opponents 
outlaws. An armed force was organised under Barras and marched 
upon the Hdtel de Ville. The populace was not really eager to 
support the tiiumvirs, and no resistance was made to the troops of 
the Convention. Robespierre and his associates were still discussing 
what measures to adopt when the enemy reached the hall. All 
except Couthon and St. Just made futile attempts to commit 
suicide: they were seized, identified before the revolutionary 
tribunal, and thence despatched to the scaffold, where they perished 
(28 July). The fall of Robespierre’s head was greeted with thunders 
of applause by the assembled crowd. His name has been identified 
with all the worst excesses of the revolution and handed down to 
the execration of posterity. But it is doubtful whether he was the 
ruthless villain that he has been depicted. He was certainly a 
better man than Marat, Hébert, Collot d’"Herbois, or Barére, and from 
some points of view he is more estimable than Danton. The hatred 
against him is due not so much to the enormity of his crimes, black 
though they are, as to the feeling of horrified surprise that so much 
evil in the world could be effected by so insignificant a man. 
Robespierre owed his position not to his abilities, which were me- 
diocre, but to the persistence of a. shallow intellect working within 
narrow limits. His egregious vanity helped him, by blinding his 
eyes both to moral turpitude and to tactical errors. He was fitted 
by nature to be the despot, partly respected and partly feared, of a 
town council or a board of guardians: the malice of destiny called 
him to be an active agent in an earth-shaking revolution. 


III. Tuermipor1aAn Reaction. Enp or CoNVENTION. 
27 Juty, 1794, To 26 OcroBEr,. 1795, 


§ 17. The fall of Robespierre was followed by a quarrel between 
the two parties who had combined to bring it about. The party of 
the Committees, headed by Billaud-Varennes, Barére and Collot 
d’Herbois, had aimed merely at the establishment of their own 
power, and had no idea of altering the system of government. On 
the other hand, the moderates and Dantonists, Boissy d’Anglas, 
Sieyés, Chénier, Tallien, Fréron, Barras, etc., wished to terminate the 
terror and to restore confidence by a period of peace and lenity. 


550: ~ MODERN EUROPE. Guar, xxur- 


Public opinion was on their side, they had a majority in the Con- 
vention, and after a brief struggle they succeeded in carrying their 
measures. ‘The vacancies in the Committees of Public Safety and of 
General Security were filled by Thermidorians, and thus freed from 
the control of Billaud. The law of 22 Prairial was repealed, the 
revolutionary tribunal suspended, and its president, Fouquier- 
Tinville, brought to trial. In order to weaken the authority of the 
Committees, the law by which a third of their members were re- 
newed every month was strictly enforced, and Billaud with his 
adherents, tinding themselves powerless, resigned their seats. The 
maximum was abolished, and the Commune of Paris was replaced 
by- two Committees, of finance and police, nominated by the 
Convention. The terrorists had no longer any constitutional 
position, and their only hope lay in exciting a movement of the mob 
by the help of the Jacobin club. ‘To meet this danger an irregular 
force was formed of members of the wealthy class, known as the 
jeunesse dorée of Fréron. A series of collisions between them and 
the Jacobins ended in the closing of the famous club by decree of 
the Convention (Dec. 1794). The reaction reached its climax when 
Carrier, the brutal oppressor of Nantes, was tried and executed. 
The liberty of the press was restored, an amnesty was granted to 
the Vendeans, and finally, after long debates, the 63 Girondists, 
who had been expelled in October, 1793, recovered their seats in the 
Convention. Billaud, Collot, and Baré’e were arrested, and the two 
first were exiled. 

§ 18. The reaction in Paris was materially aided by the success 
which attended the French arms in the campaign of 1794. Austria 
and Prussia were hopelessly alienated by the recent affairs in Poland, 
and the latter made no secret of its wish to retire from the western 
war. England, the most active member of the coalition, suggested 
that the Prussian troops should remain at the expense of the allies. 
As Austria refused to contribute anything for this purpose, England 
had to undertake the whole burden. In April Lord Malmesbury 
concluded a treaty at the Hague, by which, in return for a subsidy, 
60,009 Prussians under Méllendorf were to be placed at the disposal 
of the maritime powers. ‘This being settled, it was determined to 
take Landrecies and to advance thence upon Paris, Coburg, the 
Austrian commander, took the town on the 80th of April, but the 
advance of Pichegru, with the army of the north, compelled him to. 
give up the project of invasion and to stand on the defensive. The 
English troops under the duke of York were defeated at Turcoing, 
and Ypres was taken by Pichegru’s lieutenant, Moreau. But the 
campaign was decided, not so much by French victories, as by 
Kosciusko’s revolt in Poland, which French intrigues had helped to 


As, 


— 


Aw. 1794--1795. FRENCH VICTORIES. 551 


bring about. The attention of the two great German powers was 
suddenly called away to the east. In spite of the treaty of the 
Hague, Mdllendorf refused to march to the Netherlands, and the 
Prussians remained obstinately inactive on the Rhine, while their 
king hurried off to Poland. Thugut determined to sacrifice Belgiuin 
to the chance of acquiring territories nearer home. The French 
pressed on to attack Charleroi; Prussian inaction enabled Carnot to 
supply numerous reinforcements under Jourdan, and after a long 
and obstinate, but indecisive battle at Fleurus (26 June), Coburg 
retreated behind the Meuse, while York retired into Brabant. 
Pichegru entered Brussels, and the Netherlands were once more in 
French possession. French victories on the side of Piedmont and 
the Pyrenees completed the humiliation of the allies. Their only 
success was at sea, where Howe utterly defeated the French fleet off 
Ushant on the first of June. 

Coburg, the most capable general of the allies, resigned his com- 
mand in disgust at the shameful evacuation of Belgium, and was 
succeeded by Clairfait. After a short delay, the French resumed 
their advance, drove the Austrians across the Rhine, and occupied 
Cologne, Bonn, and Coblentz in rapid succession. The retirement of 
the Prussians at the same time gave to France absolute possession 
of the left bank of the Rhine. Pichegru, regardless of the winter, 
now invaded Holland, which was defended by the English under 
Walmoden, the duke of York having been recalled. No real resist- 
ance was made to the invaders, who crossed the rivers on the ice, and 
a regiment of cavalry captured the Dutch flect in the Texel. The 
stadtholder fled with his family to England, and Holland was made 
into the Batavian republic in complete dependence upon France. 

1794 was a great year to France : in addition to Savoy and Nice, 
she had conquered Belgium, Holland, Germany left of the Rhine, 
and strips of Piedmont and northern Spain. The coalition fell to 
pieces under these repeated blows. The grand-duke of Tuscany, 
brother of Francis II., was the first to come to terms with the 
republic (Feb. 1795). The obvious interests of Prussia and the 
persistence of the anti-Austrian party at Berlin, overcame at last 
the scruples of Frederick William II., and a treaty was signed at 
Basel in April. France retained the Prussian territories to the left 
of the Rhine on the understanding that on the conclusion of peace 
some compensation should be given on the right bank. France 
recognised the neutrality of the states of Northern Germany as the 
allies of Prussia. In June, Spain followed the contagious example, 
and purchased peace by ceding the Spanish Port of St. Domingo.. One 
of the obstacles to this treaty was removed by the death of the 
dauphin, whom the royalists called Louis XVII. (8 June). The 


552 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP, xx. 


unfortunate prince had never been freed from his imprisonment 
in the Temple. The royal title was now assumed by the count of 
Provence as Louis X VIII. 

§ 19. The triumph over foreign enemies by no means terminated 
the distress in France. The asstgnats were debased and Paris was 
threatened with famine. The opponents of the reaction took 
advantage of the discontent to provoke a rebellion against the Con- 
vention. On 1 Prairial (May 20, 1795) the assembly was attacked 
by the mob, which demanded “bread and the constitution of 
’93.” One of the deputies was shot, and for six hours disorder and 
outrage prevailed as in the early days of the revolution. But the 
dominant party had taken precautions against attack, and 20,000 
regular troops under General Menou put down the rising. The 
leaders of the mob were executed. But the success of the re- 
actionary party involved a new danger by encouraging the royalists. 
The English government opened negotiations with the Chowans in 
Brittany and the leaders of La Vendée. In order to give con- 
sistency to the anti-revolutionary movements, it was determined to 
invite a number of emigrants to France, and they landed, with the 
count of Artois at their head, in the peninsula of Quiberon. But the 
scheme was foiled by the activity of Hoche. After driving the 
emigrants from French soil, he turned upon the rebels, and succeeded 
in suppressing them by a judicious combination of firmness and 
conciliation. In 1796 Charette and Stofflet, the Vendean leaders, 
were captured and shot. 

§ 20. Meanwhile, the Convention had drawn up a new con- 
stitution, the work of the Girondists. Legislative power was 
entrusted to two councils, one, the Conseil des Anciens, consisting 
of 250 members over 40 years of age, the other of 500 members 
over 380. Livery year a third of each council was to retire in favour 
of new members. The deputies were to be chosen by electors 
nominated by the primary assemblies which consisted of all citizens 
over 21 and paying a direct tax. The executive was to be in the 
hands of a Directory of five persons, one of whom was to retire 
every year. ‘The Five Hundred were to nominate ten candidates for 
each place in the Directory, and from these ten the final selection 
was to be made by the smaller council. The retiring director was 
determined by lot. The fear of a complete reversal of their policy 
induced the Convention to add a special article, that two-thirds of 
the new assembly should be chosen from among its own members, 
and only one third was to be freely elected. If the electors refused 
to choose these two-thirds, then the Convention would select them 
itself. This undisguised resolution to preserve the rule of the 
dominant majority naturally roused the bitter indignation of all 


A.D. 1795. THE DIRECTORY. 853 


opponents, whether royalists or terrorists. The Convention was called 
upon to face a new rising in Paris on the 13 Vendémiaire (5 Oct.). 
The command of the troops was entrusted to Barras, but he handed 
on the responsibility to Napoleon Bonaparte, a young Corsican, born 
just at the time when Choiseul annexed that island (1768), who 
had won considerable reputation in the siege of Toulon, but who 
had recently been removed from his command on account of his 
supposed connection with Robespierre. Bonaparte took his measures 
with characteristic decision. Cannon were brought up from a 
neighbouring camp, and volleys of grape-shot speedily dispersed the 
rebels with great loss. On the 26th of October the Convention 
was dissolved, and the new constitution came into operation. 


IV. Tue Direcrory. 26 Ocroser, 1795, ro 9 Novemser, 1799. 


§ 21. On the 27th of October the newly elected deputies were 
joined by twice their number of members of the Convention, and 
the whole body was divided into the two prescribed councils. . The 
Five Hundred took up their quarters in the riding-school where the 
Constituent Assembly had sat, while the 250 Ancients remained in 
the Tuileries. The first duty of the new legislature was the 
election of the five Directors, and out of the fifty nominees the 
Ancients chose La Réveillere-Lepaux, Letourneur, Rewbell, Sieyés, 
and Barras. On the refusal of Sieyes to accept office, Carnot was 
selected in his place. The Directors were installed in the 
Luxemburg, which was assigned as the seat of the executive 
government, and at once proceeded to settle their respective 
functions. Rewbell, an active and experienced lawyer, assumed 
the control of justice, finance and foreign affairs; La Réveillére, a 
feeble enthusiast for what he called ‘ theophilanthropy,” became 
a sort of minister for home affairs; Barras, better fitted for intrigue 
than for government, took the police; Letourneur managed the 
navy and the colonies; while the direction of the war fell into the 
experienced hands of Carnot. The choice of the Directors illustrates 
the primary object.of the dominant majority, which was to prevent 
the possibility of a restoration of the monarchy. They were all 
men who had voted for the death of Louis XVI., and had thus 
given hostages to the republic. 

The internal condition of France was. calculated to inspire the 
new government with despair. The Directors “entered the 
Luxemburg without finding even a table to write upon, and the 
state was in no better order than the palace.” The exchequer was 
empty, the assignats had fallen to a thousandth part of their 
nominal value, the army was without pay, and the people were 

25% 


554 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. xxi 


without food. The abolition of the maximum had done nothing to 
restore confidence, while it had removed the compulsory character 
of production and exchange. The Directors were not, as a body, 
men of distinguished ability, yet they succeeded in grappling with 
these difficulties with fair success. ‘The comparatively settled 
character of their rule did more than anything else to put an end 
to the general sense of insecurity, which was the chief cause of the 
stagnation of trade. Agriculture and all kinds of industry revived, 
as the feverish interest in politics declined, and the clubs were 
deserted for the fields and the workshop. But the finances proved 
a crucial difficulty. The number of assignats in circulation 
amounted nominally to 45,000,000,000 francs, and further issue 
was impossible. After several expedients had been tried, the 
Directors determined to issue a new kind of paper-money, mandats 
territoriaux, each of which entitled the holder on demand to a 
specified portion of the national domains. /andats to the value of 
800 millions sufficed to buy up all the debased assignats, and the 
block from which the latter were printed was broken. The 
mandats, on account of the comparative ease of realisation, were at 
first weleomed by the people, and their issue gave temporary relief 
to the government. But before long depreciation began, and the 
state advanced nearer and nearer to bankruptcy. 

But the real credit of the Directory in its early months lies not 
so much in any particular measures, asin the fact that the domestic 
history of France loses for a time its exciting character. Parties 
were at last exhausted by their incessant struggles, and though 
they had no special enthusiasm for the government they preferred 
it to anarchy. Brittany and La Vendée were pacified by the 
admirable measures of Hoche. The old party of the Jacobins made 
a despairing effort, under Babceuf’s leadership, to recover their 
ascendancy in Paris, but the plot was detected and its originators 
were put to death (May, 1796). The quietude of internal politics 
was accompanied, and partly caused, by a tremendous extension of 
the foreign war. 

§ 22. The establishment of a settled government in France 
offered a favourable opportunity for a general peace, but England 
and Austria, who had answered the treaty of Basel by a new 
offensive alliance (May, 1795), refused to take advantage of it. 
Thugut, who directed foreign politics at Vienna, was inspired with 
bitter enmity towards Pritia, and was eager to compensate 
Austria for its exertions by acquiring territory. _In England, Pitt 
for a long time strenuously resisted the growing antipathy to the 
war, and when at last he opened negotiations, he found that France 
would not grant his most. essential demand, the restoration of the 


A.D. 1795-1796. PROGRESS OF THE WAR. 555 


Netherlands to Austria. Moreover, the allies were encouraged by 
the fact that the desertion of Prussia had not led, as was expected, 
to a complete collapse of the war in Germany. The French had 
begun the campaign by capturing the great fortress of Luxemburg, 
and their two armies, under Pichegru and Jourdan respectively, 
received orders to cross the Rhine and take Mainz. But Pichegru, 
the conqueror of Belgium and Holland, was dissatisfied with the 
reward of his services and with the course of affairs at home. 
Like Dumouriez under similar circumstances, he determined to 
betray his country, and opened negotiations with the prince of 
Condé. The advance of Jourdan compelled him to obey his 
instructions, he took Mannheim, and Mainz was closely blockaded. 
But under these circumstances the conduct of the French was nct 
likely to be very eflicient. By a series of masterly movements, the 
Austrian generals, Clairfait and Wiirmser, broke up the blockade, 
recovered Mannheim, and drove the French in disorder across the 
Rhine. Hostilities were closed in December by an armistice, and 
Pichegru, whose treachery was suspected though not proved, was 
recalled by the home government. 

§ 23. In 1796 Carnot planned a grand triple attack upon the power 
of Austria. Two French armies were to advance through Germany, 
while a third was to enter Italy. It was in the latter country that 
results of decisive importance were obtained. In 1792 the French had 
annexed Savoy and Nice, and since then they had been pressing slowly 
but surely over the Maritime Alps. In 1795 a victory of General 
Scherer at Loano had secured the entrance into Piedmont. Scherer 
was superseded by Bonaparte, who had recently married Josephine 
Beauharnais, the mistress of Barras, and who was supported by 
Barras and Carnot among the Directors. Bonaparte found his 
soldiers in the most lamentable condition, starving for want of 
clothes and food, but he encouraged them with the prospect of the 
plunder of Italy. He was opposed by 2000 Piedmontese troops 
under Colli and 40,000 Austrians under Beaulieu, and his first 
object was to separate the two hostile armies. This he succeeded 
in effecting by rapid victories at Montenotte and Dego (April, 
1796). Determined not to leave a hostile province in his rear, he 
disregarded the express instructions of the Directors and pursued 
the Piedmontese to the gates of Turin, where he forced Victor 
Amadeus III. to sign an armistice. The king withdrew from the 
coalition, disbanded his army, and surrendered his chief fortresses as. 
hostages till the conclusion of peace. The Directors were compelled 
to approve the disobedience of the general, and their scruples were 
overpowered by the sums of money which were extorted from the 
conquered, and which materially helped the government to cope- 


556 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. xxItt. 


with financial difficulties. Bonaparte now turned to pursue the 
Austrians, and a small engagement at Fornbio enabled him to carry 
the line of the Ticino and to cross the Po. Beaulieu now made a 
stand on the Adda, the second of those vertical rivers which form 
the only lines of defence on the Lombard plain. Bonaparte 
attacked him at Lodi, and by an onslaught carried the bridge and 
gained a complete victory (9 May). This success gave the whole 
of Lombardy to the French; the Austrians retreated to the Mincio, 
to their great fortress of Mantua. Milan sent in its submission, 
Bonaparte entered the city in triumph, and, in accordance with his 
usual custom, demanded the payment of twenty millions of francs 
for the privilege of subjection to France. Still more obnoxious than 
these pecuniary exactions was the reckless robbery of works of art, 
which were sent off wholesale to Paris. In despairing indignation 
the citizens of Pavia rose against their conquerors, but Bonaparte 
put down the revolt with severity, and took advantage of it to 
justify fresh extortions. His express instructions were to march 
upon Leghorn, Rome, and Naples, but he was determined to leave 
southern Italy till he had crushed the Austrians, and the Directors 
could not afford to quarrel with a general who poured such lavish 
supplies into the exhausted treasury. The great difficulty in the 
way of a French advance upon the Mincio lay in the fact that the 
district as far as Bergamo belonged to Venice, and Venice was a 
neutral power. Cynically disregarding the neutrality, Bonaparte 
occupied Brescia, and thus compelled the Austrians to encroach 
upon Venetian territory by entering Peschiera. Beaulieu was 
again defeated at Borghetto and driven to retreat into Tyrol. 
Bonaparte now picked a quarrel with Venice on the ground that 
they had admitted the Austrians to their territory, made himself 
master of the Adige by seizing Verona and Legnago, and then laid 
siege to Mantua. He was now able to give some attention to the 
wishes of the Directors. Naples he had admitted to an armistice, 
but he sent Augereau to occupy Ferrara and Bologna in the papal 
states, while another detachment under Murat  treacherously 
seized and plundered Leghorn, in spite of the fact that the grand- 
duke of Tuscany had in the previous year made peace with France. 
While enjoying the hospitality of the grand-duke at Florence, 
Bonaparte was treacherous enough to urge upon the Directors the 
impolicy of leaving a brother of the emperor in possession of his 
territories. 

These easy and not very creditable aggressions were suddenly 
interrupted by a new danger from the north. The Austrian 
government determined on a great effort to regain their hold upon 
Italy, and Wiurmser, recalled from the Rhine, was despatched with 


A.D. 1796. BONAPARTE IN ITALY. 557 


30,000 men to relieve Mantua. In the Tyrol he was joined by the 
scattered remnants of Beaulieu’s army. Unfortunately, Wiirmser 
was compelled, by his instructions from Vienna, to divide his forces, 
and this enabled Bonaparte to follow his favourite plan of attacking 
the hostile detachments in succession. Already several of the 
French positions had been carried, when Bonaparte raised the siege 
of Mantua, and Wiirmser, who hurried up to the city, found that 
his march was useless, and that he had left the bulk of his troops 
to be attacked in his absence. At Lonato (38 August), Bonaparte 
crushed one Austrian detachment under Quasdanowich, and then, 
turning upon Wiirmser, who had returned from Mantua, he 
defeated him at Castiglione two days later, and drove him back 
to the Italian Tyrol. Mantua, which had been re-victualled—the 
only result of these great exertions—was again besieged, but as the 
French had lost most of their artillery, they had to be content with 
a blockade. Wiirmser was. preparing to renew his advance when 
Bonaparte determined to forestall the attack. Hurrying north- 
wards, he routed the Austrians at Bassano, and as he stood between 
them and their retreat, they were compelled to throw themselves 
into Mantua, where they were closely imprisoned. 

Bonaparte’s intention had been, after settling affairs in Italy, to 
march through the Alps into Germany and to join with the other 
French forces in an attack upon Austria. In Germany, unfortu- 
nately, the French had not the advantage of an undivided command. 
Two armies were prepared, under Jourdan and Moreau, with 
instructions to advance eastwards by the valleys of the Main and 
the Necker respectively. The miserable condition of the troops 
delayed the opening of the campaign, and by that time everything 
seemed favourable. ‘The mission of Wiirmser into Italy left them 
confronted by only one Austrian army, under the archduke Charles, 
who in this year won a great reputation as a general. The French 
advanced into the heart of Germany, when the archduke took a 
bold resolution worthy of Bonaparte himself. Leaving 30,000 men 
to face Moreau, he threw himself with vastly superior forces upon 
Jourdan, defeated him in a series of engagements, and drove him 
across the Rhine. ‘The French campaign was ruined, and Moreau, 
who had advanced into Bavaria, saw himself in danger of having 
his communications cut off. He conducted his retreat with con- 
spicuous courage and succ@ss, and succeeded in passing the Rhine 
without any serious losses (25 October). The Austrians concluded 
the campaign by taking the fortresses of Hiiningen and Kiel. 

The failure of the French invasion of Germany compelled Bona- 
parte to remain in Italy, and at the same time enabled the 
Austrians to make a fresh effort for the relief of Beaulieu in 


558 - MODERN EUROPE. _ Calptexnn 


Mantua. 40,000 men under Alvinzi and 18,000 under Davidowich 
entered Italy from the Tyrol and marched by different routes 
towards Verona. Bonaparte had employed the recent interlude in 
consolidating French influence in Italy. Against the wishes of the 
Directors he dethroned the duke of Modena, and formed his terri- 
tories into the Cispadane Republic. ‘Then he tried to induce Pied- 
mont and Venice to join France, Lut both states preferred to 
retain their neutral position. This was another of the charges 
which the general was preparing against Venice. On the news of 
the Austrian advance, Bonaparte marched against Alvinzi, and 
checked him at Carmignano (6 November). But meanwhile 
Davidowich had taken ‘Trent and was approaching Rivoli. Bona- 
parte, in danger of being surrounded, was compelled to give way, 
and retreated to Verona, while Alvinzi followed him. Never was 
the French position more critical, and nothing but a very bold 
move could save them. With reckless courage Bonaparte attacked 
Alvinzi at Arcola, and after three days’ hard fighting won a com- 
plete victory. He then forced Davidowich to retreat to the Tyrol. 
The danger was averted, and the blockade of Mantua was con- 
tinued. But Austria, as if its resources were inexhaustible, deter- 
mined on a fourth effort in January, 1797. Alvinzi was again 
entrusted with the command, while another detachment under 
Provera advanced from Triuli. Bonaparte collected all his forces, 
marched against Alvinzi, and crushed him at Rivoli (15 Jan.). 
But meanwhile Provera had reached Mantua, where Bonaparte, by 
a forced march, overtook him, and won another complete victory 
in the battle of La Favorita. The fate of Mantua was at last 
decided, and the city surrendered on the 2nd of February. With 
a generosity worthy of the glory which he had obtained, Bona- 
parte allowed Wiirmser and the garrison to march out with the 
honours of war. He now turned to Romagna, occupied Bologna, 
and terrified the Pope into signing the treaty of Tolentino. The 
temporal power was allowed to exist, but within very curtailed 
limits. Not only Avignon, but the whole of Romagna, with 
Ancona, was surrendered to France. Even these terms, harsh as 
they were, were not so severe as the Directors had wished. But 
Bonaparte was beginning to play his own game; he saw that 
Catholicism was regaining ground in France, and he wished to 
make friends on what might prove aftemall the winning side. 

§ 24. Affairs in Italy were now fairly settled: two republics, 
the Cisalpine in Lombardy, and the Cispadane, which included 
Modena, Ferrara, and Bologna, had been created to secure French 
influence in Italy. The only open question was the relations. with 
Venice. The French had occupied the Venetian territory from 


A.D. 1796-1797. PRELIMINARIES OF LEOBEN. 559 


Bergamo to Verona, and had established close relations with those 
classes who were dissatisfied with their exclusion from political 
power. When the republic armed against the danger of a revolt, 
Bonaparte treated it as another ground for that quarrel which he 
artfully fomented for his own purposes. But at present he had 
other objects more immediately pressing than the oppression of 
Venice. Jourdan’s army on the Rhine had been entrusted to 
Hoche, whose ambition had long chafed at the want of an oppor- 
tunity, and who was burning to acquire glory by retrieving the 
disasters of the last campaign. Bonaparte, on the cther hand, was 
eager to anticipate a possible rival, and determined to hurry on his 
own invasion of Austria, in order to keep the war and the negotia- 
tions in his own hands. The task of meeting him was entrusted 
to the archduke Charles, who had won such a brilliant reputation 
in 1796, but who was placed at a great disadvantage to his oppo- 
nent by having to obey instructions from Vienna. ‘he French 
carried all before them. Joubert occupied Tyrol, Masséna forced 
the route to Carinthia, and Bonaparte himself, after defeating the 
archduke on the Tagliamento, occupied Trieste and Carniola. The 
French now marched over the Alps, driving the Austrians before 
them. At Leoben, which they reached on 7th April, they were 
less than eighty miles from Vienna. Here Austrian envoys arrived 
to open negotiations. They consented to surrender Belgium, 
Lombardy, and the Rhine frontier, but they demanded compensa- 
tion in Bavaria. ‘This demand Bonaparte refused, but offered to 
compensate Austria at the expense of a neutral state, Venice. 
The preliminaries of Leoben, signed on the 18th April, gave to 
Austria, Istria, Dalmatia, and the Venetian provinces between 
the Oglio, the Po, and the Adriatic. At this moment Hoche and 
Moreau, after overcoming the obstacles interposed by a sluggish 
government, were crossing the Rhine to bring their armies to bear 
against Austria. They had already gained several successes when 
the unwelcome news reached them from Leoben, and they had to 
retreat. Bonaparte may have failed to extort the most extreme 
terms from Austria, but he had at any rate kept both power and 
fame to himself. 

No sooner had the preliminaries been concluded, than Bonaparte 
received intelligence from Venice which he afterwards paraded as 
a justification for the treaty. On the 17th of April a ising took 
place at Verona, known as the pdques véronaises, in which some 
French soldiers were killed. Although it was a mere popular out- 
break, which the government could not possibly have kindled, 
Bonaparte seized upon it as a pretext for war, and sent troops to 
threaten Venice with attack. In the panic caused by this threat 


560 MODERN EUROPE. Cuap. xx, 


the Senate granted all that was demanded of them. The old 
oligarchical constitution, which had existed for centuries, was 
abolished ; an offensive alliance was concluded with France, and a 
French garrison was admitted into the city. In secret articles the 
ordinary tribute of works of art was exacted, and a vague expres- 
sion about ‘ exchange of territories ” was introduced so as to cover 
the intended cessions to Austria, of which the Venetians had 
absolutely no idea. The French at once seized Corfu and the 
other Venetian possessions in the Levant. Soon afterwards Genoa, 
the other surviving republic of Italy, was compelled by French 
dictation to receive a democratic constitution. 

§ 25. Meanwhile, affairs in Paris were hurrying to a crisis. The 
cardinal defect of the constitution of the year III. was, that it 
provided ne means of adjusting any difference that might arise 
between the executive and the legislative powers.. As long as twwo- 
thirds of the councils were composed of former members of the 
Convention, the Directors were supported by the. majority which 
had elected them, and this question was avoided. But on the 
1 Prairial of the year V. (May, 1797) half of these members had 
to retire by lot, and at the same time one of the Directors was to 
vacate his seat. For some time parties had been growing up in 
the legislative body: the moderates, consisting of almost all the 
newly elected deputies, who formed one-third of the councils, 
wished to carry on the policy of reaction, and many of them were 
inclined to favour a restoration of the monarchy. ‘This party had 
its headquarters at a house in the Rue de Clichy, and was known in 
consequence as the Club de Clichy or the Clichyens. In opposition 
to them, the members of the Convention wished to stop at the 
point they had reached, and to maintain the republic at all hazards. 
A similar division had arisen in the Directory itself. Carnot and 
Letourneur belonged to the moderate party, while Rewbell, Barras, 
and La Réveillére were therough-going opponents of any change 
that might affect their own power. The elections, as was foreseen, 
gave a strong majority to the moderate party, and among the new 
deputies was Pichegru, whose treason had not yet been diyulged, 
and who became a prominent leader of the Clichyens. The re- 
tiring elector was settled by lot, and this, as many believed un- 
fairly, fell upon Letourneur. His place was taken by Barthélemy, 
the negotiator of the treaty of Basel, and universally respected for 
courage and probity. He at once joined himself to Carnot, so that 
the balance of parties remained the same in the Directory, and the 
triumvirs, as the other three were called, retained their numerical 
superiority. . 

These changes brought the Directors into frequent and open 


A.D. 1797. THE EIGHTEENTH FRUCTIDOR. 561 


collision with the legislative councils. As there were no constitu- 
tional means of overcoming the difficulty, Rewbell and his associates 
determined to employ force against their opponents, and to make 
themselves absolute in France. The moderate party played into 
their hands by attacking Bonaparte’s treatment of Venice and 
Genoa. They thus excited the most bitter hostility of the one 
man without whose support the Directors would hardly have 
ventured to take active measures. Hoche was first chosen as the 
agent of the coup d'état, but he drew back as he began to under- 
stand the real purpose for which he was employed. The triumvirs 
then appealed to Bonaparte, who refused to have any part in the 
business himself, but who sent Augereau, a military democrat, ‘ to 
kill the royalists.” The intention of the three Directors was to feign 
the discovery of a conspiracy against the republic, and then by active 
measures to remove their two colleagues, and to purge the councils 
of their chief opponents. ‘lhe councils were fully sensible of their 
danger, and passed decree after decree against the unauthorised 
assembling of troops and other arbitrary acts. But decrees were a 
poor weapon against force, and Carnot, in spite of an open quarrel 
with Barras, seemed resolutely blind to the acts of his colleagues. 
On the 18th Fructidor (Sept. 4, 1797) the long-prepared blow was 
struck. Barthélemy was arrested in his chamber, but Carnot 
contrived to escape by a door into the Luxemburg gardens. At 
the same time Augereau, with 12,000 men, surrounded the Tuileries, 
and, as the guard had already been corrupted, occupied the palace 
without opposition. Pichegru and several other deputies were 
imprisoned. The councils were now assembled to accept perforce 
the dictates of the Directory. Carnot, Barthélemy, and _ fifty- 
three deputies were to be exiled to any place which the Directors 
might choose. In forty-nine departments the elections were annulled, 
and the Directors might appoint nominees of their own. The laws 
against priests and emigrants, which the moderate party had 
recently repealed, were renewed. ‘The Directors were invested with 
absolute powers ; they could suppress journals or political clubs at 
pleasure, and the appointment of all judges and magistrates was 
placed in their hands. ‘The prisoners were banished to the pesti-. 
lential coast of Guiana, where half of them perished. Two new 
Directors, Merlin de Douai and Francois of Neufchatel, were 
elected at the dictation of the triumvirs. The only justification 
advanced for these measures was the treachery of Pichegru two 
years before, proofs of which Bonaparte had discovered in the 
papers of D’Antraigues, an emigrant who had been arrested in 
Venice. There was absolutely no proof that Pichegru had renewed — 
his schemes, for which the opportunity was long past, or that he 


562 MODERN EUROPE - OHAP. xxitt, 


had communicated them to any of his colleagues in the council. 
On these flimsy grounds the Directors had overthrown the con- 
stitution, and had set a fatal example by calling in the army to 
settle domestic affairs. Almost equally harmful was the apathy 
with which the citizens of Paris watched the overthrow of liberty 
by a tyrannical executive. 

§ 26. Moreau, asa friend of Pichegru, was removed from his 
command on the Rhine and replaced by Hoche, who died shortly 
afterwards at the age of twenty-nine. The army was now entrusted 
to Augereau, whom the Directors were eager to remove from Paris. 
Meanwhile, Bonaparte was still engaged in negotiating with the 
Austrians, who had delayed coming to ‘terms as long as there was 
a chance of a change of government at Paris. It was this that had 
made Bonaparte so angry with the attacks upon his conduct in Italy, 
and had led him to support the executive. Now that the obstacle in 
the way of peace had been withdrawn, he was by no means eager to 
approve the coup d’état, which had gone much further than he had 
ever intended. He had no confidence in the Directors, whom he 
knew to be jealous of his ascendancy, and he was especially in- 
dignant at the appointment of Augereau to the command on the 
Rhine. He showed his displeasure by the independent way in 
which he hurried on the negotiations. In addition to the territories 
arranged in the preliminaries of Leoben, Austria demanded the 
cession of Venice itself, and to this the Directors were obstinately 
opposed. ‘They wished to compel the acceptance of their terms 
by the advance of Augereau into Germany. But Bonaparte was 
determined not to admit a rival to a share in the work, and, m 
open defiance of his instructions, concluded the treaty of Campo 
Formio on the 17th of October. France obtained Belgium, Lombardy 
as far as the Adige, which was made into the Cisalpine Republic, 
and the Ionian Islands. Austria received Istria, Dalmatia, Venice, 
and the Venetian territory as far as the Adige. A congress was to 
meet at Rastadt to arrange peace between Krance and the Empire, 
but, by a secret article, Austria undertook to employ all its influence 
to obtain the cession of the Rhine frontier. All possibility of resist-. 
ance on the part of Venice was crushed by the city being handed 
over to the Austrians before the French quitted it. The Directors 
were bitterly enraged at the news of the treaty, and for a moment 
dreamt of refusing its ratification. But the unanimous delight with 
which the nation welcomed the peace compelled them to approve 
the act of the domineering general. 

§ 27. Bonaparte remained in Italy, occupied with the organisa- 
tion of the Cisalpine Republic, until the middle of November, when 
he travelled by way of Rastadt to Paris. There he was received 


A.D. 1797-1798. BONAPARTE IN EGYPT. 563 


in triumph, and many of his friends urged him to seize upon the 
supreme power. But he was conscious that the moment had not 
yet come, and’ refused to mix himself up with political parties. 
England, now the only remaining enemy of France, had conclusively 
maintained its maritime supremacy in 1797. Spain having formed 
an alliance with France in the previous year, the Spanish fleet was 
attacked and crippled by Jervis at the battle of St. Vincent 
(14 Feb.). In spite of the mutinies at Spithead and the Nore, 
Admiral Duncan was able to blockade the Texel, and when the 
Dutch fleet at last ventured out it was destroyed at Camperdown 
(6 Oct.). In December Bonaparte was appointed to command the 
“army of England,” and it was universally supposed that the neigh- 
bouring island was to be invaded. But Bonaparte himself was 
determined on another enterprise, the conquest of Egypt. For a 
long time the East, with its traditions of great conquerors, had 
exercised an invincible fascination on his ambitious mind. He 
had also personal motives for his decision. ‘To prevent men from 
forgetting him he must win new successes, and Europe no longer 
offered a convenient opening. Moreover, he wished the existing 
government to ruin itself, and he had a lurking hope that, during 
his absence, disasters might befall France, which would compel, not 
only his recall, but also his advance to absolute power. The Directors 
on their side were not unwilling to get rid of a general whose glory 
overshadowed their own power. In May he set out with a splendid 
armament from Toulon, captured Malta through the treachery of 
some of the knights, and on the 30th of June appeared before 
Alexandria. In his manifesto he tried to conciliate the native 
population, by professing that he was the friend of the Sultan and 
of the Mohammedan religion, and that his only object was the 
overthrow of the tyrannical rule of the Mamelukes. His. troops, 
the best that France could produce, speedily overcame all resistance, 
and on the 25th of July he entered Cairo in triumph. <A few days 
later Nelson, who had been vainly hunting the expedition through 
the Mediterranean, found the French fleet in Aboukir Bay and 
completely annihilated it in the great battle of the Nile (1 August). 
This disaster not only deprived the French of the power to retreat, 
but cut off all communication with Europe. 

§ 28. The Congress of Rastadt, which had met in November, 
1797, was from the beginning a hollow sham. The lesser German 
States had sent envoys in the belief that the integrity of the 
Kmpire was to be restored. But Austria and Prussia were both 
pledged to the cession of the left bank of the Rhine, and this was 
reluctantly confirmed in March, 1797. The question now arose as 
to how the dispossessed princes were to be compensated, and it was 


564 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. XXIII. 


proposed to secularise the ecclesiastical states of central Germany. 
This was naturally approved by Prussia as a leading Protestant 
power, but Austria refused its consent. As it became evident that 
France was inclining more and more to a Prussian alliance, Thugut, 
in spite of a strong opposition party in Vienna, began to meditate a 
renewal of the war. In this intention he was encouraged by new 
acts of aggression on the part of France. In Rome the French 
envoy, Joseph Bonaparte, promoted democratic intrigues against 
the papal government, and, in the disorders which arose, General 
Duphot was shot. This gave the desired pretext for war to the I'rench 
government, and Berthier, who had been Bonaparte’s aide-de-camp, 
was ordered to advance upon Rome. The populace, already pre- 
pared for a revolution, welcomed the invaders. The aged Pius VLI., 
on his refusal to abdicate his temporal power, was removed to Tus- 
cany, and thence to Valence, where he died in the next year. Ber- 
thier now surrendered the command to Masséna, who organised a 
regular pillage of the city, and aroused such general discontent that 
even his own soldiers insisted on his resignation. Rome, like the 
other conquests, was organised as a republic on the French model. 
Only the names were borrowed from classical times. — Instead of 
Directors there were Consuls, and the Ancients and the Five 
Hundred were represented by a Senate and a Tribunate. Similar 
measures were taken at the same time in Switzerland. French 
intrigues provoked a revolt in the Pays de Vaud, and when the 
Bernese government tried to put down the rebels, France declared 
war. One of the objects of the campaign was to obtain money, 
as the Directors were reduced to great straits by the failure of those 
supplies from Italy which had been so plentiful in the previous 
year. Berne was taken, and the treasure found there was con- 
fiscated.. The old constitution of Switzerland was abolished, and a 
new Helvetic Republic, in which every inhabitant was to have 
equal political rights, was proclaimed at Aarau in April. Geneva 
was now united to France, and the German territory on the left of 
the Rhine was formed into four I'rench departments. 
These aggressions aroused once more the wrath of the great 
Powers of Europe, and England was able to form a coalition still more 
formidable than that of 1798. Besides Austria, Naples, and most 
of the German States, Russia and Turkey also took up arms against 
France. Turkey had obvious grounds for hostility in the invasion 
of Egypt. In Russia a complete change of policy had followed the 
death of Catharine II. (Nov., 1796) and the accession of her son, 
Paul I. Paul, whose mind was hardly sane, was bitterly opposed 
to the reforming ideas of his mother. He restored all the old forms 
of despotism in Russia, and his fanatical hatred of Jacobinism led 


A.D. 1798-1799. FRENCH DiSASTERS. 565 


him to form a close alliance with Austria, by which he undertook 
to send a Russian army into Italy. The war was commenced by 
Ferdinand IV. of Naples, who was driven to imprudent haste by the 
energy of his wife, Caroline, a sister of Marie Antoinette, and by 
the confidence which was inspired by the arrival of Nelson’s fleet 
after the victory of the Nile. On the 22nd of November war was 
formally declared against France, and a Neapolitan army, organised 
and led by the Austrian General Mack, marchedupon Rome. The 
French garrison retired, and the authority of the exiled Pontiff was 
nominally restored. But the action of the Neapolitans proved as 
fatal as it was ill*timed. Championnet, with a French army, de- 
feated the incompetent Mack and advanced to Capua. Naples was 
panic-stricken, the royal family fled to Nelson’s ships, and by the 
end of January the whole kingdom was reduced and formed into the 
Parthenopean Republic. At the same time Charles Emmanuel IV. 
of Sardinia and the grand-duke Ferdinand III. of Tuscany were 
deposed, and their territories occupied by the French. 

This extension of territory at the beginning of a great war was a 
serious error for France. Especially fatal was the occupation of 
southern Italy at a time when the combined Austrian and Russian 
forces were to be faced on the Adige. The French frontier ex- 
tended from Holland to Naples, and it was exposed to attack on 
almost every point. The centre of the line was Switzerland, which 
had been neutral territory until its seizure by the French. Masséna 
was in command here, and his instructions were to advance through 
the mountains so as to cut off connection between the Austrians in 
Italy and in Germany. On his north Jourdan was to march along 
the line of the Danube upon Vienna, while in Italy Scherer was to 
hold the line of the Adige until Masséna could join him from the 
Tyrol and help him to crush the enemy. ‘The campaign was 
commenced by Masséna (March, 1799), and he succeeded in ad- 
vancing as far as the Inn valley. But meanwhile the archduke 
Charles had defeated Jourdan at Stockach (25 March) and drove him 
back across the Rhine. A week later Scherer was routed at Mag- 
nano and forced to retire to the Adda, where he was promptly super- 
seded by Moreau. Masséna, finding that the two lateral campaigns 
had failed, and that his own flanks were now exposed to attack, 
retreated to Zurich. The Austrians now occupied Rastadt, where 
the Congress was still sitting in spite of the outbreak of hostilities, 
and the French envoys were killed (28 April). Tradition ascribed 
this outrage to Thugut, and it is probable that he authorised, not 
the murder, but the seizure of the envoys’ papers. In Italy the 
campaign of 1799 went decisively against the French. They were 
opposed by Suwarow, the veteran Russian commander, who had a 


066 MODERN EUROPE. . _ CHap. xx. 


great advantage over his Austrian predecessors by refusing to take 
instructions from the military council at Vienna. Suwarow arrived 
in Lombardy in April, and at once defeated the French on the 
Adda. With the fall of Milan the Cisalpine Republic suddenly 
collapsed. Moreau retired to Alexandria, but by a rapid march 
Suwarow surprised Turin in their rear. Cut off from retreat and 
from reinforcements, Moreau’s only hope lay in the arrival of Cham- 
pionnet’s army, which Macdonald was bringing up from Naples. 
But again Suwarow was too rapid for the French, and, out-marching 
Moreau, he cut Macdonald’s troops to pieces on the Trebbia, after 
three days of hard fighting (17-19 June). Moreau now collected 
the remnant of the French forces and conducted a masterly retreat. 
Suwarow was eager to pursue him and to invade France. But he 
was paralysed by the selfishness of the Austrian government, which 
wished to make conquests for itself rather than to crush France or 
to terminate the war. Suwarow was compelled to remain in Italy, 
while all the Lombard fortresses were reduced and while Mantua 
was besieged. Meanwhile the Directors sent a new army into Italy, 
and this time entrusted the command to Joubert, whose reputation 
was as yet unsullied by defeat. At Novi, Joubert met Suwarow, 
-but found to his surprise that Mantua had already fallen, and that 
che had to face two armies instead of one. After an heroic struggle 
against overwhelming odds, the French were completely defeated 
and their general left dead upon the field. Italy was now entirely 
lost to France. Cardinal Ruffo had already effected a revolution 
in Naples, to which Ferdinand IV. and his family were restored by 
the English fleet. Nelson affixed an ineradicable stain upon his 
reputation by supporting the king and queen in a policy of reprisal, 
which was quite as horrible as the reign of terror in Paris. In 
spite of a solemn promise of amnesty, 30,000 patriots were thrown 
into prison and the majority of them were punished with death or 
exile. It was a proof that kings could be at least as treacherous 
and as cruel as Jacobins. Just after the French cause in Italy had 
been ruined at Novi, an English armament, under the duke of York, 
landed in Holland, captured the Dutch fleet in the Texel, and 
threatened Amsterdam. It was due rather to York’s incapacity 
than to any success of the French, that this was the first and last 
success of the invaders. 

§ 29. The disasters of 1799 naturally made a profound impression 
upon public opinion in France, and the new elections in May 
returned to the councils a large majority hostile to the Directors, 
upon whose shoulders the blame of failure was thrown. Sieyés, 
who had emerged from the insignificance into which he had fallen 
during the Terror, and who was now a leader of the moderate party, 


“A.D. 1799. RETURN OF BONAPARTE. ‘567 


was chosen Director in place of Rewbel, whose turn it was to retire. 
The old quarrel between the executive and the legislature broke 
out again, the only difference being that this time it was the latter 
which took the initiative. La Réveillére and two of his colleagues 
were compelled to retire and their places were filled by Gohier, 
Moulins, and Ducos. Barras, who had lost all reputation and 
importance, was now the only remaining member of the original 
Directory. The general feeling of discontent encouraged Sieyés to 
plan the overthrow of the constitution of 1795, its chief fault in 
his eyes being that he had had no share in framing it. His 
own scheme had been long matured in his mind, but he needed the 
support of a man of action to carry it through. After some hesi- 
tation he fixed upon Joubert as the instrument of his designs, 
and sent him into Italy to win a great reputation. But the battle 
of Novi frustrated this plan, and, after vainly trying to gain over 
Bernadotte and Moreau, Sieyés was obliged to postpone matters. 

For a long time nothing had been heard of Bonaparte, whose 
reputation had grown in proportion to the failures of his successors, 
and who was popularly regarded as a martyr to the enmity of the 
Directors. After reducing Egypt, and discovering that his action 
had forced the Porte into war with France, Bonaparte determined 
to anticipate attack by invading Syria. For some time he carried 
all before him, but was at last repulsed from the walls of Acre by 
the obstinacy of Djezzar Pacha and the bravery of the English 
sailors under Sir Sydney Smith (May, 1799). This defeat marks a 
turning-point in his career. His troops were decimated by sickness 
when he led them back to Egypt. There he found that Murad 
Bey, the Mameluke leader, had again made head against the 
French. At the battle of Aboukir the rising was suppressed, but 
at this moment Bonaparte received intelligence from France. The 
news of the loss of Italy and the discredit of the Directors con- 
vinced him that the long expected moment had come. Regardless 
of the hardsbips in which he had involved his army, and of the 
almost certain fate to which he left it, he decided to return at once 
to France. Carefully disguising his intentions, he contrived to set 
sail in a smail frigate with Murat, Marmont, Lannes, and Berthier. 
The deserted troops were left under the command of Kleber, who 
bitterly denounced Bonaparte’s cold-blooded treachery. 

Before Bonaparte’s arrival France had been saved from the most 
pressing dangers. General Brune had recovered Holland and forced 
the duke of York to capitulate. But the great crisis occurred in 
Switzerland. Suwarow had been compelled by Austrian jealousy 
to give up his plan of invading France, and had been sent into 
Switzerland to co-operate. with another. Russian army” under 


568 MODERN EUROPE. Cuar. xxi, 


Korsakow. But before he could effect the difficult crossing of the 
Alps, Masséna had already fallen upon Korsakow and had utterly 
crushed him at the battle of Zurich (26 Sept.). On arriving in 
Switzerland Suwarow found that he had come too late, and that 
advance or retreat were alike impossible. With desperate resolution, 
he attempted’ a new and unexplored passage through the Alps, 
and after almost incredible difficulties and hardships he brought his 
army into safety at Coire. Convinced that he had been betrayed 
by Austria, the veteran general threw up his command and returned 
to Russia. 

Masséna’s success had hardly been gained when it was forgotten 
in the universal outburst of enthusiasm which welcomed Bona- 
parte on his landing at Fréjus (9 October). From this moment 
the history both of France and of Europe is bound up with his. 
Bonaparte was the very man to carry out the design of Sieyés, but 
a great obstacle existed in the mutual enmity of the two men. 
However, a short stay in Paris convinced the general that he could 
gain his end with no other ally, and he felt satisfied that he could 
easily exclude the Abbé from any real share in power. <A recon- 
ciliation was easily effected, and Bonaparte undertook to overthrow 
the existing government, the implied condition being that Sieyés 
should then be allowed to intrcduce his constitution. The 18th 
Brumaire (9 Nov.), was fixed for the cowp d'état which was to 
avenge the 18th Fructidor. Sieyés could command a majority 
among the Ancients; and in the Five Hundred the conspirators 
possessed a great advantage in the fact that Bonaparte’s brother, 
Lucien, had just been elected president. To prepare the way for 
intimidation, if it should be needed, the Councils were induced to 
transfer their sitting to St. Cloud. Bonaparte, with the assistance 
of his four companions from Egypt, had no difficulty in gaining 
over the chief officers. he only opponents in the army were 
Bernadotte, who had ambitions of his own and supported the 
existing constitution, and Jourdan and Augereau, who were inclined 
to Jacobinism. Fouché, the head of the police department, was 
always ready to support the winning side. On the appointed day 
Sieyés and Ducos commenced operations by resigning their seats in 
the Directory, and Barras was compelled to do the same. Gohier 
and Moulins, who courageously refused to resign, were arrested. 
Bonaparte, accompanied by devoted troops, went in person to St. 
Cloud and entered the Council of the Ancients. He was so con- 
fused that in his harangue to. the deputies he made no allusion ‘ 
to the fear of a Jacobin revolt, which was the feigned pretext of 
the coup d'état. On arriving among the Five Hundred, he was 
received with such a chorus of execration that he had to be car- 


A.D. 1799. CONSTITUTION OF SIEYES. 569 


ried fainting from the hall. The whole plot seemed on the verge 
of failure, when Lucien Bonaparte arrived, and encouraged the 
soldiers to clear the hall by force. This completed the revolution. 
A small body of carefully chosen deputies was assembled in the 
evening, and they voted the appointment of a commission to draw 
up a new constitution, and of a provisional consulate to carry on the 
government in the interval. The three consuls were Bonaparte, 
Sieyés and Ducos. 

§ 30. Sieyés now brought forward the constitution which had so 
long been a secret in his own breast, and of which even Bonaparte 
had as yet no knowledge. The great object of this marvellous 
conception was to avoid the dangers of frequent popular elections. 
Every election since 1795 had been more and more reactionary, and 
there was no doubt that before long a royalist majority might be 
returned. Against this danger every possible precaution was to be 
taken, even at the risk of destroying the elementary rights of the 
people which had been established with such pomp and circum- 
stance in 1789. Sieyés proposed that the adult male population 
should elect 500,000 men from whom all the municipal officers 
were to be chosen. The 500,000 were to choose 50,000 who were 
to furnish all the officials of departments. Finally the 50,000 were 
to choose 5000, and these alone could fill places in the government 
and the legislature. The choice of all officials from these lists was 
vested, not in the people, but in the government, and the lists were not 
to be altered for ten years. As regards the legislature, Sieyés pro- 
posed to create as many bodies as there are processes in any measure. 
A Council of State was to initiate all laws, they were then to be 
discussed in a Tribunate, and finally were to be accepted or rejected 
without discussion in a Legislative Body. ‘To give final security 
to his system and his party, a Senate, whose members held their 
seats for life, was to be created, with powers to veto any laws which 
should infringe upon the constitution. The Senate had the power 
of electing its own members and also those of the three legislative 
bodies. The executive power was to be entrusted to two Consuls, 
one for peace and one for war. Above them was to be a Great 
Elector, a purely ornamental personage, who should represent the 
nation in diplomatic affairs. The Great Elector nominated and 
dismissed the Consuls, and could himself be deposed by the senate. 

This elaborate scheme seemed intended to avoid the possibility 
of change by putting an end to government. Every element was 
too weak to do anything. As Bonaparte himself described it 
afterwards, “ Sieyés put shadows everywhere—shadow of legislative 
power, shadow of judicial power, shadow of a government; it 
required a substance somewhere.” There could be no doubt as to 


26 


570 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. XXIII. 


where he would place the substance. When the scheme came up 
for discussion, he accepted the greater part of it with slight 
alteration, but scornfully swept away the Great Elector and the 
two Consuls. ‘Do you know,” he said to Sieyés, “a man of mean 
enough character to play such an apish performance? Can you 
have imagined that a man with any sense of honour could resign 
himself to the part of a hog fattened on so many millions?” In 
the place of these phantom officials he established a First Consul 
with two colleagues. The First Consul was to have the power of 
making peace and war, of appointing all state officials and judges, 
and even of initiating laws, which were only to be drafted by the 
Council of State. The other two consuls, who were only put in 
to gratify republican prejudices, had no other function than that 
of advising their chief. 

Thus mutilated, the Constitution of the year VIII. was accepted 
with hardly a murmur. Bonaparte, of course, became First Consul. 
As Sieyés refused a place of official impotence, the post of Second 
Consul was given to Cambacéres, an eminent lawyer, who was always 
willing to serve the established government. The Third Consul 
was Lebrun, who had been secretary to Maupeou under Louis XV. 
Everything seemed to prosper well for the new organisation. The 
people wished for peace and order, and cared little for power. 
Bonaparte’s absence had given him a great advantage in that he 
was attached to no particular party, and therefore had no profes- 
sional opponents. He was wise enough to adhere to his profession 
that the new constitution was to end all civil conflict. Nevertheless 
the new government was degrading to France, and involved the 
destruction of all that was most healthy in the work of the 
Revolution. The Republic was at an end, and the era of despotism 
had begun. 


CHAPTER XXIV. 
EUROPE DURING THE AGE OF NAPOLEON. 


I. THE ConsuLaTE.—§ 1. Internal government of France under the Con- 
sulate. § 2. Foreign politics; Campaign of 1800; battle of Marengo. 
§ 3. Negotiations; battle of Hohenlinden; treaty of Lunéville. § 4. 
Armed Neutrality of the Northern Powers; bombardment of Copen- 
hagen; assassination of Paul I. § 5. Affairs in Egypt; capitulation 
of the French army. § 6. Peace ofAmiens. § 7. Bonaparte’s despotic . 
government; Consulate for life; Concordat and Civil Code. § 8. 
French aggressions in Italy, Holland, and Switzerland. § 9. Settle- 
ment of German affairs after the treaty of Lunéville. § 10. Renewal 
of war between England and France; occupation of Hanover by the 
French, § 11. Royalist conspiracy of Pichegru’ and Cadoudal; 
attempted implication of Moreau; murder of the duke of Enghien. 
§ 12. Establishment of the Empire. II, Toe Tuirp CoaLirion,— 
§ 13. European relations in 1804. § 14. French aggressions; Napoleon 
becomes King of Italy. § 15. Formation of the third coalition. § 16. 
Projected invasion of England. §17. Campaign of 1805; Ulm, 
Trafalgar, Austerlitz, § 18. Treaties of Schénbrunn and Pressburg, 
§ 19. Aggrandisement of the Bonaparte family, § 20. The Confede- 
ration of the Rhine, § 21. Prussia quarrels with France. § 22, 
Collapse of Prussia after Jena. § 23, The Berlin Decree and the Con- 
tinental System. § 24. Campaign in East Prussia; revival of the coali- 
tion. § 25. Battle of Friedland ; peace of Tilsit. § 26. Affairs of Scan- 
dinavia; English fleet bombards Copenhagen; extinction of house of 
Vasa in Sweden. III. THE PENINSULAR WAR AND THE CAMPAIGN OF 
1809 AGAINST AUSTRIA.—§ 27. French occupation of Portugal. § 28. 
Intervention in Spain; deposition of the Bourbons. § 29, Popular 
risings in Spain; capitulation of Baylen.  § 30. English in Portugal; 
battle of Vimiera; Convention of Cintra, § 31, Prussia and the 
administration of Stein; revival of national spirit in Germany; Stein 
retires. § 32, Interview of Napoleon and Alexander I. at Erfurt. 
§ 33. Napoleon in Spain; Sir John Moore’s retreat to Corunna. 
§ 34, Austrian war in 1809; occupation of Vienna; battles of Aspern 
and Wagram. § 35. Wellesley in Portugal and Spain; battle of 
Talavera; the English evacuate Spain, § 36. The Walcheren Expe- 
dition, § 37. Treaty of Vienna; annexation of the Papal States; of 
Holland; of Northern Germany. § 38. Napoleon divorces Josephine 
and marries the Arch-duchess Maria Louisa; breach with Russia. 
§ 39, The Spanish Cortes and the new Constitution. § 40. The Penin- 
sular War from 1810 to 1812, IV. THE War or LIBERATION.— 
§ 41. European relations in 1811, § 42. Expedition to Moscow and 
disastrous retreat. § 43, Prussia breaks with France; alliance with 


572 MODERN EUROPE. CuHapP. xxiv. 


Russia and military preparations, § 44. Napoleon’s preparations. 
§ 45. The War of Liberation to the armistice of Poischwitz. 
§ 46, Austria joins the coalition. § 47. Second period of the war; 
battle of Leipzig; Germany freed from the French. § 48. Welling- 
ton’s campaign of 1813, § 49. The Allies advance to Paris; Napo- 
leon’s abdication. § 50, Restoration of the Bourbons ; peace of Paris ; 
Louis XVIII.’s Charter. V. THE CONGRESS OF VIENNA AND THE 
HunpRED Days,—§ 51. Congress of Vienna; settlement of kurope. 
§ 52. Napoleon leaves Elba and recovers his power in France, 
§ 53. Murat’s rising in Italy; its failure. § 54, Campaign in Bel- 
gium; Waterloo; Napoleon sent to St. Helena. § 55, Fate of Murat. 
§ 56. The Allies again occupy Paris; Louis XVIII. restored; second 
peace of Paris, ; 


I. THe ConsuLATE. 


§ 1. Bonaparte lost no time in setting to work to re-organise the 
institutions of France. The principles which he followed were 
those of the old régime rather than of the constituent assembly. 
The excessive emphasis which had been laid upon the rights of man 
and the final authority of the popular will, was replaced by an 
absolute centralisation which Richelieu would have been proud to 
imitate. Every official in the commune or the department was 
appointed by the First Consul, and absolutely dependent upon his 
will. Prefects took the place of the old Intendants, and governed as 
despotically and effectively as their predecessors. The government 
of France became a vast machine, in the working of which the 
people had no control and desired none. It was to Bonaparte’s 
interest to make the administration good, and he was careful in the 
choice of his agents. Talleyrand was minister of foreign affairs. 
Fouché kept the management of police, the finances were entrusted 
to Gaudin, military affairs to Berthier, and the home department 
to Lucien Bonaparte. ‘There was great competition for places in the 
new legislative councils. The Senate was filled with tried adherents 
of Bonaparte, whose fidelity could be trusted. The Legislative 
Body, the dumb assembly, consisted of nobodies. ‘The Tribunate, 
whose function was to discuss without being able to alter or reject, 
contained some brilliant names, Benjamin Constant, Chénier, 
Ganilh, and J. B. Say. This body, in which the voice of freedom 
was occasionally heard, was regarded with great jealousy by the 
First Consul. He did all in his power to discredit it; he made it 
sit in the Palais Royal, and he transferred as many of its functions 
as he could to the Council of State, which he intended to use as the 
chief instrument of his will. No one could be more keenly sensitive 
to hostile criticism. Not content with suppressing all the indepen- 
dent journals, he banished Madame de Stiiel, Necker’s daughter, 
from Paris, because her friend Constant had displeased him by a 


A.D. 1799. THE CONSULATE. 573 


speech in the Tribunate. The abolition of the old parties, of which 
he made such parade, was only intended to lead to the creation of a 
single party, his own followers. He had not the slightest conception 
of justice and mercy: his one motive was calculating ambition. 
He offered terms to the rebels in Brittany, because he thought that 
their devoted courage would be useful to him. When they refused 
his terms, he had them hunted down like wild beasts. That he 
had no religious scruples had been proved by his attitude to 
Mohammedanism in the East, but no sooner had he risen to power 
than he set himself to gain over the Roman Catholic priests, 
because he saw that they might become the firmest bulwark of his 
authority. 

§ 2. In foreign politics, as might be expected, Bonaparte was no 
less autocratic than at home. While the nation desired peace, he 
wished the war to continue, partly because he hoped for some great 
success to consolidate his power, and partly because he intended to 
satisfy the most pressing financial needs by the spoils of conquered 
nations. This organised pillage, of which he had set the first 
example in his Italian campaign of 1796, now becomes a definite 
object of the French government. In spite of these motives he 
could not afford to run directly counter to the popular wish, and 
his first act was to express a desire for peace in two letters which 
he sent directly to George ILI. and Francis II. ‘This theatrical 
contempt for diplomatic forms was designed to impress the French, 
and was thoroughly characteristic of Bonaparte. In England, Pitt, 
who believed France to be exhausted, and that s» changeable a 
people would not long tolerate a military dictatorship, was 
determined to continue a war which seemed to him on the eve of 
success. In his reply he hinted at the restoration of the Bourbons 
as the real object of England, and this enabled Bonaparte to rouse 
the national wrath against foreign dictation. Austria, which was 
now in possession, not only of its old territories but of the Papal 
States and of Piedmont, was naturally unwilling to treat on the 
basis of Campo Formio, and replied that it could only negotiate in 
conjunction with its allies. Bonaparte published his own letters 
and the answers, and thus proved his desire for peace, while he 
secured the continuance of the war. Great preparations were made 
in France for the new campaign, which opened with more favourable 
prospects because Paul I., disgusted with the conduct of Austria, 
had practically withdrawn from the war. The command in Italy 
' was entrusted to Masséna, who was opposed by vastly superior 
forces under Melas, the colleague of Suwarow at Novi. The army 
of the Rhine was led by Moreau. The archduke Charles, dis- 
gusted with the policy of Thugut, had retired from the Austrian 


574 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP, xxrv. 


command, which was entrusted to Kray, the victor of Magnano, A 
third French army was secretly collected in France around Dijon, 
but its destination was uncertain, and for a long time its very 
existence was doubted by the allied powers. The plan of the 
campaign was elaborated by Bonaparte, and with one great object, 
that a great blow might be struck by himself. Moreau was to cross 
the Rhine and drive the Austrians into the Rhine valley. But he 
was not to advance beyond Ulm, although a great success in 
Germany was almost certain to drive Austria to submission, and 
this could not be done by any success, however brilliant, in Italy. 
Masséna, for his part, was simply to make as good a stand against 
Melas as he could with his vastly inferior forces. Meanwhile, 
Bonaparte with the army of reserve, for which all supplies were care- 
fully reserved, was to cross the Alps into Lombardy and take Melas 
in the rear. Surrounded and cut off from retreat, the Austrians 
could not possibly escape a great disaster. The plan does as much 
credit to Bonaparte as a strategist as it proves him to be wanting 
in all the qualities of a statesman or a patriot. 

The first to move was Melas, who attacked the French in the 
Apennines, separated them by moving on the centre of their line, 
and drove Masséna with one division into Genoa, while the other, 
under Suchet, held the line of the Var. In Germany Moreau 
commenced to cross the Khine on the 25th of April. By admirably 
calculated movements, he not only effected the crossing without 
loss, but within a fortnight he won five victories over Kray, who 
was forced to retire to Ulm (10th May). Here he was compelled, 
by Bonaparte’s orders, to stop and remain inactive, although one 
energetic movement would have opened the way to Vienna. It is 
perfectly certain that if the Directory had given such orders to 
Bonaparte, he would have disobeyed them. By this time every- 
thing was ready for the First Consul, who assumed the command 
of the reserve army on the 8th of May. He crossed the Alps by 
the St. Gothardt, an exploit which, according to his flatterers, 
rivalled the deeds of Hannibal, but was really far less difficult and 
dangerous than Suwarow’s march in the previous year. By the 
end of May all lis troops were in Lombardy, and Melas, who had 
disbelieved all the reports about the army of reserve, found himself 
caught in a trap. Everybody expected that Bonaparte would at 
once march to the relief of Masséna, who had obeyed his orders 
with the greatest loyalty, and had held out with such stoicism that 
both garrison and citizens were reduced to the last extremities. 
But ambition won the day against gratitude and simple duty. 
Bonaparte thought only of inflicting a crushing blow upon Melas, 
and left Masséna to his fate. On the 4th of June Genoa was surren- 


AEE 


A.D. 1800. MARENGO. 575 


dered, but the besieged obtained honourable terms. Meanwhile 
Bonaparte had taken such elaborate precautions to prevent the 
escape of Melas, that he very nearly mcurred a defeat. In utter 
ignorance of the enemy’s position he arrived at Marengo near 
Alessandria, and sent off a large detachment under Desaix to Novi, 
just as Melas had made up his mind to attack the French, and to 
cut a retreat through them. On the 14th of June the Austrians 
advanced, and their superior numbers carried all before them. 
Melas had already retired to his tent to write the bulletin of his 
victory, when the return of Desaix, who had heard the sound of 
cannon, completely changed the fortunes of the day. A flank 
charge of cavalry’ broke the Austrian column, which fell into a 
sudden panic and was utterly routed. No victory was ever won 
more completely by chance, but Bonaparte suppressed all the 
true accounts of the battle, and the official bulletins attributed 
every success to the general’s strategy. ‘The battle of Marengo, 
however won, was for the moment decisive. Melas was so utterly 
crushed that he could not renew hostilities, and an armistice was 
concluded at Alessandria by which the Austrians surrendered the 
whole of northern Italy as far as the Mincio. Bonaparte’s safe 
passage of the Alps removed the obstacle in the way of Moreau’s 
advance, and the latter at once gave up an inactivity which he 
detested himself, and which had excited loud murmurs from his 
officers. Instead of directly attacking Ulm he marched beyond it, 
and compelled the Austrians to fight by threatening their stores at 
Donauwoérth. A victory at Hochstett (19th June) forced Kray to 
evacuate Ulm and to retreat towards Bohemia. Moreau took Munich 
a week later, and then concluded a suspension of hostilities. 

§ 3. After concluding the convention of Alessandria, Bonaparte 
handed over the Italian army to Masséna and returned to Paris. 
The temporary cessation of the war was occupied in negotiations. 
France had contrived to gain over two valuable allies. Paul I. of 
Russia, whose foreign policy was as insane as his domestic govern- 
ment, was now wholly estranged from Austria, and had conceived 
an enthusiastic admiration for the First Consul, in whom he saw 
the real destroyer of the revolution and the champion of absolutism 
in Western Europe. Bonaparte took care to encourage this feeling 
by sending back without ransom 6000 Russian prisoners. No defi- 
nite treaty was concluded, but an understanding was arrived at 
that peace should be made between Russia and France on condition 
that Malta and Piedmont should be restored to the Knights of St. 
John and to the King of Sardinia respectively. Bonaparte had no 
intention of fulfilling these conditions, but he had no scruples about 
making promises which would gain so valuable an ally. More 


576 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. XXIV. 


distinct was the agreement with Spain, where Bonaparte had 
obtained a complete ascendancy over Godoy, “the Prince of Peace ” 
and the all-powerful minister of Charles IV. Spain restored 
Louisiana, which had once been a French colony, and France secretly 
undertook to give Tuscany, with the title of king, to the duke of 
Parma, who had married Charles IV.’s daughter. It was not felt 
as an objection to this treacherous bargain that France had no 
right over Tuscany, not even that of conquest. In spite of these 
successes, no progress was made in the negotiations with England 
and Austria. England could not make peace until affairs were 
settled in Egypt. Austria had not been seriously weakened by the 
defeat at Marengo, and was inclined to resent the terms that had 
been extorted from Melas. Only a few days after the battle 
Thugut was able to effect the last triumph of his policy, and 
concluded a new subsidy treaty with England (20 June), by 
which Austria was pledged not to make a separate peace before 
February, 1801. In spite of this the negotiations went on, and a 
prolongation of the armistice was purchased by the cession of Ulm, 
Philipsburg, and Ingolstadt. A diplomatic conference was opened 
at Lunéville, at which Cobenzl represented Austria, and Joseph 
Bonaparte France. But the only object of the Viennese govern- 
ment was to gain time, and a definite refusal to treat apart from 
England compelled a resumption of hostilities. Moreau, who had 
received reinforcements, was opposed by the archduke Joseph, over 
whom he won a crushing victory at Hohenlinden (8 December). 
The French were advancing towards Vienna, when the archduke 
Charles, who had superseded his brother, solicited and obtained an 
armistice at Steyer (25 December). Meanwhile Macdonald, at the 
head of a detachment of the army of Italy, had accomplished the 
marvellous feat of crossing the Spliigen in the middle of winter. 
He had already driven the Austrians back to Botzen when he was 
stopped by the conclusion of the armistice. 

The battle of Hohenlinden hurried on the work of the diploma- 
tists at Lunéville, which was also facilitated by the downfall of 
Thugut and the appointment to the ministry of foreign affairs of 
Cobenzl, the negotiator of Campio Formio. That treaty was taken 
as the basis of the new peace, which was signed on the 9th of 
February, 1801. France recovered its old possessions in Italy with 
the Adige as their eastern boundary, and its hold upon Holland, 
Belgium, and the left bank of the Rhine was once more confirmed. 
The only difference was that, in accordance with the agreement 
with Spain, Tuscany was transferred to the duke of Parma. The 
dispossessed princes of Germany and the grand-duke of Tuscany were 
to receive such compensation for their losses as should be approved 


A.D. 1800-1801. THE ARMED NEUTRALITY. 577 


by France. The restoration of French power in Italy implied the 
submission of Naples. But the intervention of Paul I. preserved 
that throne to the Bourbons, and Ferdinand IV. obtained peace on 
easy terms by engaging to close his ports against English vessels. 

§ 4. England was now isolated in Europe, and had to face other 
enemies besides France. Great discontent was aroused by the 
right of search, and by the high-handed way in which England 
seized upon the commodities which neutral powers were carrying 
‘to France. Paul I. was bitterly exasperated by the refusal of 
England to surrender Malta to the Knights Hospitallers, of which 
order he had been elected grand master. ‘To show his anger, he 
revived the Armed Neutrality of the northern powers, which 
Catharine II. had formed in 1780. <A treaty was signed between 
Russia, Sweden and Denmark on the 16th of December, 1800, and 
was soon afterwards joined by Prussia, which had remained neutral 
since the treaty of Basel. The contracting powers announced their 
intention to resist by force English interference with their com- 
merce. England was at this time occupied with a ministerial 
crisis. Pitt had in 1800 carried his great measure, the Union 
between England and Ireland, and had purchased the consent of 
the Irish by a promise to repeal the oppressive penal laws against 
the Roman Catholics. The king’s obstinate orthodoxy made 
him unable to fulfil this promise, and at the beginning of 1801 he 
resigned his office to the feeble hands of Addington. But the 
retirement of the great minister made no difference to the spirit 
with which the war was carried on. Determined not to sacrifice 
the advantages of maritime ascendancy, the government treated 
the Armed Neutrality as a declaration of war, and sent a fleet under 
Parker and Nelson into the Baltic. On the 2nd of April, Nelson 
bombarded Copenhagen and compelled the Danes to retire from the 
league. He was on his way to attack Russia when he received 
news which altered the whole aspect of affairs. Paul I.’s insane 
government had excited universal discontent in Russia, and a con- 
spiracy was formed among the courtiers, to which his son Alexan- 
der was privy, for the Czar’s deposition. But deposition in Russia 
involves assassination, and Alexander I. found himself raised to 
a throne the way to which was prepared by parricide (23 March). 
This event broke up the Armed Neutrality. Peace was made 
between England and Russia, in which the points at dispute were 
compromised. England retained the right of confiscating merchan- 
dise intended for France, but agrecd that the presence of a man-of- 
war should protect neutral vessels from privateers, and that a 
blockade should not be recognised unless it were effective. 

§ 5. England and France were both desirous of peace, to which 

26* 


578 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. XXIV. 


only one serious obstacle now remained, the war in Egypt. By a 
sort of tacit agreement, negotiations were suspended until that 
quarrel should be settled by arms. After Bonaparte’s desertion, 
Kleber saw clearly that all chance of a permanent occupation was 
at an end, and offered to arrange an evacuation with Sir Sidney 
Smith. On the 24th of February a convention was signed at El 
Arish by which the French army was to be allowed a free return. 
At this moment instructions arrived from England that no treaty 
should be made unless the French laid down their arms. Sir 
Sydney Smith was compelled to recall the convention, and Kleber 
at once gave battle to the Turks at Heliopolis, where 10,000 men 
utterly routed 80,000. The French had recovered Cairo, and 
seemed more secure in Egypt than ever, when Kleber was assas- 
sinated by an obscure fanatic. The command was transferred 
to Menou, the most incompetent general that France produced 
during the revolutionary epoch, who had shown such enthusiasm 
for the Egyptian expedition that he had become a convert to 
Islam. An English army now landed in Egypt under Sir Ralph 
Abercromby, and speedily decided the campaign. Before Alex- 
andria (21 March) the English won a complete victory, in which 
Abercromby was killed, and forced Menou and his army to seek 
refuge in the city. In June the French garrison surrendered Cairo, 
and in August the arrival of troops from India compelled Menou to 
capitulate at Alexandria. 

§ 6. The last obstacle to peace was now removed, and on the Ist 
of October preliminaries were signed in London. England restored 
all its conquests with the exception of Trinidad and Ceylon. Egypt 
was to return to the Porte, and Malta to the Order of St. John. 
On the other hand, France was to evacuate Naples and the Papal 
States, and the Ionian Islands were to be formed into a republic. 
The agreement was welcomed with enthusiasm by the English 
people, but there were many clear-headed men who had watched 
the career of Bonaparte, and foresaw that his ambition would not be 
content with what he had already gained. ‘Their misgivings were 
justified by the high-handed way in which a constitution, designed 
in French interests, was forced upon the unwilling peoples of 
Holland and the Cisalpine Republic. The government, however, 
was anxious to conciliate public opinion, and disguised the resent- 
ment which was felt at these acts of aggression. The final treaty 
was signed at Amiens on the 27th of March, 1802. Europe was to 
enjoy a short period of peace. But it was soon evident that the 
peace was’a hollow one, that most of the real grounds of quarrel 
had been omitted, rather than settled, and that nothing but new 
exertions could check the aggressions of France. 


A.D. 1801-1802. DOMESTIC GOVERNMENT. 579 


§ 7. Meanwhile the internal government of France, still 
nominally republican, was becoming more and more centralised to 
suit the will of the First Consul, who steadily aimed at the 
establishment of despotism. He took up his residence in the 
Tuileries, and did all in his power to revive the forms of the old 
court. In this way many of the emigrants were attracted back to 
France, where they were received with great favour. No pains 
were spared to gain over the royalists, and to destroy the repub- 
licans, and the hypocritical pretext was always advanced, that 
arbitrary measures were needed to protect “liberty and equality,” 
and to uphold the principles of the revolution. In December, 1800, 
as Bonaparte was on the way to the opera, he narrowly escaped 
from the explosion of an infernal machine. ‘This incident was at 
once employed to carry out his purposes. To avoid judicial forms 
the Senate was induced to issue a decree—which was not one of 
ts functions—by which 180 Jacobins were condemned to exile. 
It was afterwards proved that the attempted assassination was the 
work of a few Chouans, and that the Jacobins were perfectly 
innocent; but the difficulty was got rid of by altering the terms of 
the decree so as to show that the sentence was for their previous 
conduct. ‘The slightest breath of opposition threw the First Consul 
into a fury, and to remove the insignificant checks that were 
imposed upon his power he did not scruple to infringe the constitu- 
tion. The justices of the peace, the most healthy and independent 
class of officials, were deprived of their most important functions and 
dimivished in number. Perhaps no law is more characteristic of 
Bonaparte’s system than that which established special tribunals. 
By this the government could, in political and other cases, dispense 
with the course of ordinary justice, and conduct the trial by a 
tribunal consisting of three judges, members of the criminal court, 
three officers, and two assessors. As the last five were nominated 
by the First Consul, it is obvious that he could ensure the decision 
that he wished. ‘The law was strennously opposed in the Tribunate, 
there was not a single valid argument in its favour, but so strong 
was the government influence that it was carried by forty-nine 
votes to forty-one. ‘This futile resistance was enough to exasperate 
Bonaparte, and the criticism of some details in his new ccde induced 
him to take active measures against a body which dared to express 
an opinion of itsown. By the constitution a ninth of the members 
of the Tribunate had to retire every year, and the individuals were 
usually chosen by lot. On the suggestion of Cambacéres, Bonaparte 
decided that the retiring members should be nominated by the 
Senate, and thus got rid of all those who had shown the slightest 
independence. ‘The Legislative ody was “ purged” in the same 


580 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. XXIV. 


way, and henceforth the two assemblies were submissive instru- 
ments. 

These open advances of despotism were simply disregarded by 
the great mass of Frenchmen, who bad ceased to take any interest 
in politics. ‘The few sincere republicans, such as Lafayette, who 
had recovered freedom by the treaty of Campo Formio, and Moreau, 
the victor of Hohenlinden, felt resistance to be vain, and retired 
into private life. A vigilant police, organised by Fouché, carried 
espionage to lengths which had been unknown under the old régime. 
At the back of the government was the irresistible force of the 
army, which was increased by a system of constant recruiting. 
And the First Consul found new and very powerful allies in the 
clergy. Himself a sceptic, he fully appreciated the importance of 
religion as a political lever, and determined to use it for his own 
ends. In spite of the traditions of the revolution and the repug- 
nance of many of his supporters, he opened negotiations with the 
Pope, which ended in the conclusion of the Concordat (April, 1802). 
By this, the Roman Catholic religion, which was already freed, 
became once more the state religion. Archbishops and bishops 
were nominated by the First Consul and confirmed by the Pope ; 
appointments to benefices were made by the bishops and approved 
by the First Consul. To clear away disputes between non-jurors 
and clergy who had accepted the civil constitution, all existing 
bishops were removed, but most of them were re-appointed. . The 
Concordat gave considerable immediate advantages to Bonaparte, as 
the clergy were strictly subordinated to the state and became its 
willing vassals. But in the end it was the church which reaped 
the greatest advantage, and from this time we may trace the rise of 
modern ultramontanism in France. Next to the Concordat, the 
most important of Bonaparte’s permanent measures was the pro- 
mulgation of the famous Code Napoléon. Though it has been 
called after him, he was not the real originator of this reform. The 
Constituent Assembly had commenced the work, and the Conven- 
tion made great strides towards its completion, but, after being 
interrupted by the Directory, it was resumed and finished in the 
time of the Consulate. Bonaparte’s personal share in it was limited 
to the alteration of several articles, such as those about divorce, 
to suit his own special needs. The Code was finally issued in 
March, 1804. 

The conclusion of the peace of Amiens, and the general joy with 
which it was welcomed, seemed to offer a convenient opportunity 
for obtaining a more definite sanction for a power which was already 
great enough for all practical purposes. The Senate, as usual, took 
the lead in servility, but Bonaparte’s real aims were so little under- 


A.D. 1802—1804. DOMESTIC GOVERNMENT. 581 


stood, that they only offered him a renewal of the Consulate for 
ten years. Enraged at this paltry gift, yet afraid of compromising 
himself by seeming to demand what was not offered, Bonaparte 
adroitly contrived to suggest an appeal to the people, and the 
question put to the vote was not the Consulate for ten years but 
for life. To make the matter simpler all votes not given were 
reckoned as being in the affirmative. The result of the scrutiny 
(August, 1802) was that out of 3,577,885 voters only 9,626 were 
against the proposal. Among the minority was Carnot, who had 
compromised himself by accepting one of the places in the Tribu- 
nate vacated by the “ purging,” but who began to return to the 
republican cause as its prospects appeared hopeless. After the 
plebiscite a number of changes were made in the constitution. The 
First Consul was authorised to nominate his successor, and his two 
colleagues were also to hold office for life. The powers of the Senate 
were increased, but it was not allowed to meet without a summons 
from the First Consul. The Tribunate was reduced to fifty members, 
and from this time lost all independence and importance. Bona- 
parte was never tired of repeating that the French must be ruled 
through their vanity, and to conciliate this he caused the formation 
of the famous Legion of Honour, which was to contain 6009 
members, civilians as well as soldiers, with the First Consul as 
their Chief. By the end of 1802 the government of France had 
become practically monarchical, a change of title was alone needed 
to put an end to the Republic. 

§ 8. During the interval of peace that followed the treaty of 
Amiens, Bonaparte continued to excite the misgivings of Europe 
by his high-handed treatment of the lesser states whom misfortune 
had brought into dependence on France. The Batavian Republic 
-had been organised in October, 1801, and the Dutch were too lethargic 
to make any opposition. In January, 1802, the Cisalpine became 
the Italian Republic, and the deputies, assembled at Lyons, were 
forced to offer the Presidency to Bonaparte. Switzerland could 
not be treated quite so despotically, so the First Consul encouraged 
the disputes of rival factions, then interfered as “ mediator,” and 
in that capacity established the Helvetic Republic. To secure 
dependence upon France the federal government was rendered 
powerless, and extreme independence was granted to the separate 
cantons, whose number was increased to nineteen. Piedmont, in 
spite of the representations of England and Holland, was defi- 
nitely annexed to France (Sept. 1802), and the island of Elba 
shared the same fate. To get rid of Moreau’s army, which shared 
the independent spirit of its general, and at the same time 
to revive the colonial power of France, Bonaparte dispatched an 


5s? | MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. XXIV. 


expedition to St. Domingo, where the negroes, enfranchised by 
the Revolution, had been organised under a regular government 
by one of themselves, Toussaint Ouverture. ‘Toussaint was sent 
a prisoner to France, but most of the troops perished from the 
unhealthiness of the climate. 

§ 9. At the same time the power of France was immensely 
increased by the settlement of imperial affairs in Germany. The 
treaty of Lunéville had arranged that the dispossessed princes on 
the left bank of the Rhine should receive compensation for their 
losses elsewhere. In 1801 the diet met at Ratisbon to carry out 
this article, but the real settlement was effected by private agree- 
ment of the various German states with France. To strengthen 
himself, and to conciliate a possible enemy, Bonaparte called in 
Alexander I. of Russia to assist in the mediation. It was not till 
March, 1803, that all these various arrangements were collected 
and promulgated by the diet. Thanks to the grasping ambition of 
Austria and Prussia, and the unpatriotic greed of the lesser states, 
France was able to effect a settlement which destroyed all prospect 
of a national union of Germany, and ensured the permanence of 
French influence in the country. The material for compensation 
was found in the territories of the ecclesiastical princes and of the 
free cities. All the clerical states were secularised, and forty-four 
out of the fifty cities of the empire were suppressed. Austria, as 
the most powerful rival of France, was excluded from all share of 
the spoil, and Prussia was only allowed to increase its territory in 
the north. Bonaparte’s policy was to lean upon the lesser states, 
Baden, Bavaria, Wurtemberg, and Saxony. As these princes were 
related by marriage to the Czar, their advancement was not only 
a real gain for France, but a graceful compliment to Alexander. 

These changes were not only important to the policy of Bona- 
parte, they also exercised a permanent effect upon the future of 
Germany. ‘The balance of power in the Empire was completely 
changed, the Roman Catholics lost their predominance, and the 
imperial sovereignty of the Hapsburgs became more nominal than 
ever. ‘The number of Electors had been eight since the union of 
Bavaria with the Palatinate in 1777. By the change of 1803 the 
archbishops of ‘Trier and Cologne disappeared, and their places were 
taken by Baden, Wurtemberg, Hesse-Cassel, and Salzburg, so that 
the number was now ten. It was in the Chamber of Princes that 
Austria had so long held the upper hand, and it was through this 
body that the emperors had been able to control the diet. All 
this was altered in 1808, the number of votes was diminished 
from 100 to 82, and though 26 of these belonged nominally to 
spiritual princes, they were really held by the possessors of secu- 


A.p. 1802-1803. RENEWAL OF HOSTILITIES. 583 


larised territory. The Chamber of Imperial Cities disappeared 
altogether. Whereas in the old diet the Roman Catholics had had 
a secure majority, this was now reversed, and the Protestants could 
command fifty votes as against thirty. This was another blow to 
Austrian influence. The foundations of the old Empire, long 
undermined, were now overthrown, and Bonaparte was already 
meditating the construction of a new edifice. 

§ 10. The annexation of Piedmont and the intervention in Switz- 
erland were breaches of the treaty of Amiens, and called forth 
indignant remonstrances from the English government. But Bona- 
parte was determined to exclude England from Continental affairs, 
and he replied by incessant complaints of the freedom of the 
press in this country, and the way in which the French government 
was attacked in the newspapers. A stronger ministry would have 
resorted to hostilities at once, but Addington was so anxious to 
maintain peace that he tried to satisfy the Consul by prosecuting 
for libel the editor of a French paper in London. Malta had not 
yet been given up on account of difficulties which had arisen 
about the proposed Russian guarantee, and England threatened its 
retention unless France surrendered some of its recent acquisitions. 
The appearance in the Moniteur, the French official paper, of a 
report upon the resources of Egypt brought matters to a crisis 
(January, 1803), and Bonaparte publicly insulted the English 
envoy, Lord Whitworth. At last the Knglish government pre- 
sented an ultimatum, in which was demanded the evacuation of 
Holland and Switzerland, an indemnity for the king of Sardinia, 
and that England should occupy Malta for ten years. Bonaparte 
refused these terms, and when war was declared on the 18th of 
May, he promptly imprisoned all the Englishmen that were found 
in I'rance. 

This war, which continued without intermission till 1814, was 
at first purely naval, as England had no allies on the Continent. 
English vessels seized the French colonies, of which Louisiana had 
just been sold to the United States. Bonaparte replied by closing 
all the ports of 'rance and the subject states against nglish goods, 
and by making vast preparations on the northern coast which were 
supposed to be destined for an invasion of England. But as such 
an enterprise required time and its success was doubtful, Bona- 
parte decided to attack George III. through his German electorate. 
A French army under Mortier entered Hanover (May, 1803) and 
occupied the province without difficulty. This act was in direct 
defiance of the treaty of Basel, which had guaranteed the neutrality 
of the northern states of Germany. If Frederick William II. had 
been alive it is probable that Prussia would have taken up arms 


584 MODERN EUROPE. CHap. XXII. 


to avenge this insuit. But he had died in 1797 and his son and 
successor, Frederick William III., under the influence of Haugwitz, 
had adopted as a permanent policy the neutrality which exhaustion 
had forced upon his father, After some futile negotiations, Prussia 
adhered to that inactivity which was destined before long to receive 
a terrible punishment. 

§ 11. The renewal of the English war encouraged the royalists 
to resume their schemes for a Bourbon restoration. A plot was 
concerted in which the chief movers were Georges Cadoudal, the 
Chouan leader, and Pichegru, the renegade general of the Republic. 
Cadoudal was to organise active measures for seizing the First 
Consul, while Pichegru was to gain over all who were discontented 
with the existing system. Great hopes were felt of obtaining the 
assistance of Moreau, who had been an intimate friend of Pichegru 
and was known to have quarrelled with Bonaparte. When every- 
thing was prepared, the Count of Artois was to appear in France and 
to take the lead of the movement. From a very early period every 
detail of the plot was known to the police, but they were instructed 
to allow matters to go on until all Bonaparte’s enemies were 
compromised and a decisive blow could be struck. Cadoudal and 
‘Pichegru both arrived in Paris, and the latter had an interview with 
Moreau, who refused to be made a tool of the Bourbons, but promised 
not to betray his old colleague. At last, in February, 1804, the 
government determined on action. Moreau was arrested, and at short 
intervals Pichegru and Cadoudal with a number of their accomplices. 
But Bonaparte was not satisfied until he had obtained possession of 
a Bourbon prince. He wished to give a signal example of the ven- 
geance he would take upon his enemies. Vain efforts were made 
to allure the Count of Artois to follow his fellow conspirators, and 
a new victim had to be found. On the 15th of March a detach- 
ment of French troops made a raid into Germany and captured 
the duke of Enghien, son of the prince of Condé, who was living 
at Isttenheim, near Strasburg. ‘There was not a tittle of evi- 
dence to connect him with the royalist plot, but he was brought to 
Vincennes, where his grave had been already dug, and after a hasty 
trial before a military commission was shot. All Europe stood 
aghast at this atrocious deed, and the fate of the other prisoners 
was watched with eager solicitude. Pichegru was found strangled 
in prison, Cadoudal, with several others, was executed, but Mo- 
reau, to Bonaparte’s intense indignation, was only sentenced to 
two years’ imprisonment. The charges against him had in fact 
broken down, and his only real crime was that he refused absolute 
submission to the Consul, and that he was the only man whose 
reputation and ability made him a possible rival. His sentence 


A.D. 1804. THE EMPIRE. 585 


was altered by Bonaparte to perpetual exile, and he sailed to 
America. 

§ 12. In France terror stifled the feelings of horror and sympathy 
which Enghien’s murder would naturally have aroused, and: Bona- 
parte was able to utilise this carefully managed plot to attain the 
great object of his ambition. ‘Together with the congratulations 
that were showered upon him for his escape came suggestions that 
France should be saved from similar attempts in the future by the 
establishment of a permanent form of government. The Tribunate 
took the lead in proposing that hereditary rule should be conferred 
upon Bonaparte with the title of emperor. Only one voice, that of 
Carnot, was raised against the insidious proposal. In the Senate 
there were four malcontents, who included Sieyés and Lanjuinais. 
The proffered title was at once accepted by Napoleon, as he hence- 
forth styles himself. The form of taking a popular vote was 
adhered to, but so little attention was paid toit that the formal pro- 
clamation was issued before the voting had commenced (20 May). 
Napoleon’s family now obtained formal recognition. In default of 
male heirs to himself the empire was to pass to his brothers Joseph 
and Louis, who obtained the title of Imperial Highnesses. The 
other two brothers, Lucien and Jerome, were passed over because 
they had incurred Napoleon’s displeasure. Sixteen marshals 
were created, and included the chief followers of Bonaparte, 
Murat, Berthier, etc. Cambacéres and Le Brun, hitherto colleagues 
in the Consulate, received the titles of arch-chancellor and arch- 
treasurer. ‘These and others forms were borrowed from Germany, 
and Napoleon loved to pose as a new Charlemagne, who had once 
more brought the imperial dignity from the east to the west. The 
coronation did not take place till the 2nd of December, when the 
Pope, Pius VII., was induced to be present in person. But his share 
in the ceremony was but small, as at the last moment Napoleon 
seized the crown and placed it upon his own head. The chief result 
of the pope’s visit was that he compelled Napoleon to go through 
the forms of a religious marriage with his wife Josephine, whom 
he was already thinking of repudiating. The Bonaparte family, 
especially the emperor’s three sisters, were bitterly hostile to the 
empress and to her two children by her first- husband, Eugéne 
and Hortense Beauharnais. ‘The latter was married to Louis Bona- 
parte and was treated by her husband with jealous cruelty. The 
court history of the Empire is full of the ignoble squabbles 
between the two parvenu families of Bonaparte and Beauharnais. 


586 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. XXIV. 


Il. THe Tutrp Coalition. 


§ 13. In France the establishment of the Empire was regarded 
with complacency. ‘The government was already as despotic as it 
could be, and the introduction of a new name and of the forms of 
court life was looked upon as a security for the contmuance of 
that material welfare which personal rule had undoubtedly given to 
the country. But in Europe the change was rightly regarded as 
marking the complete destruction of the old system, and it strength- 
ened the antipathy that had been roused by previous aggressions. 
Externally the state of affairs seemed favourable to the new dynasty, 
but there were not wanting signs of approaching disturbance. In 
England Pitt returned to office in May, 1804, and this in itself was 
an evil omen for France. He enjoyed the confidence, not only of 
his own nation but of Europe, and he at once set to work to resume 
the threads of that coalition of which England had formerly directed 
the resources. Alexander I. of Russia had begun to see through the 
designs of Napoleon; he found that he had been duped in the joint 
mediation in Germany, he resented the oecupation of Hanover, and 
he ordered his court to put on mourning for the duke of Enghien. 
Before long he broke off diplomatic relations with France (Sept. 
1894), and a Russian war was now only a question of time. 
Austria was the power most closely affected by Napoleon’s assump- 
tion of the imperial title. The old Holy Roman Empire could 
hardly continue to exist by the side of a younger and hardier rival. 
But Austria was not yet prepared for hostilities, and Francis II. 
contented himself with securing his own dignity against probable 
contingencies. On the 10th of September he assumed the title of 
‘Hereditary Emperor of Austria,” so that if his old rank had to be 
abandoned he would still be on an equality with the rulers of 
France and Russia. But this was not intended as the basis of a 
permanent reconciliation. While hastening to acknowledge Napo- 
leon, Austria was busied in military preparations and began to 
resume its old connection with England. Prussia was the power on 
which France was accustomed to rely with implicit confidence. 
But the occupation of Hanover and the interference with the com- 
merce of the Elbe had weakened Frederick William III.’s belief 
in the advantages of a neutral policy, and, though he could not 
make up his mind to definite action, he began to open negotiations 
with Russia in view of a rupture with France. The fluctuations of 
Prussian policy may be followed in the alternating influence of the 
two ministers of foreign affairs, Haugwitz and Hardenberg. 

§ 14. Meanwhile Napoleon, ignorant or reckless of the growing 
hostility of the great powers, continued his aggressions at the 


EN 


A.D. 1804-1805. THE THIRD COALITION. 587 


expense of the lesser states. After visiting the enormous army 
which had been collected at Boulogne, he made a triumphal pro- 
gress through Belgium to the Rhenish provinces, where he laid the 
foundations of that Confederation of the Rhine which was to be 
called into existence two years later. The vassal states found 
that they must once more model their institutions upon those of 
France. The Batavian Republic was reorganised and placed under 
the rule of a Grand Pensionary, Schimmelpenninck, whose authority 
was to pave the way for a monarchy (March, 1805). Italy, being 
more servile, was treated with less caution. The heads of the 
Italian Republic found it advisable to petition for the formation of 
the state into a kingdom, and offered the crown to Napoleon him- 
self. The offer was accepted, and on the 26th of May Napoleon 
placed the iron crown of Lombardy upon his own head. Genoa 
was annexed to France and its territory divided into three depart- 
ments. Parma and Piacenza were incorporated with the Italian 
kingdom. Piombino and Lucca were combined to form a princi- 
pality for Napoleon’s sister Eliza and ber husband, the Corsican 
Bacciochi. Naples was treated with a harshness that portended the 
speedy overthrow of the Bourbon dynasty. After settling affairs in 
his new kingdom and introducing the new code and other French 
institutions, Napoleon appointed his step-son, Hugéne Beauharnais, 
tu act as viceroy, and returned to France. 

§ 15. These acts gave the final impulse to the hostile powers, and 
before Napoleon quitted Italy the coalition had been formed. On 
the 11th of April, 1805, a final treaty was signed between Russia 
and England. The two powers pledged themselves to form an 
European league against France, to conclude no peace without 
mutual consent, to settle disputed points in a congress at the end of 
the war, and to form a federal tribunal for the maintenance of the 
system which should then be established. The immediate objects 
of the allies were the abolition of French rule in Italy, Holland, 
Switzerland, and Hanover; the restoration of Piedmont to the 
king of Sardinia; the protection of Naples; and the erection of 
a permanent barrier against France by the union of Holland and 
Belgium under the House of Orange. The coalition was at once 
joined by Gustavus IV. of Sweden, who inherited his father’s 
devotion to the cause of legitimate monarchy, and who hoped 
to recover power in Pomerania. Austria, terrified for its Italian 
‘possessions by Bonaparte’s evident intention to subdue the whole 
peninsula, was driven into the league. Prussia, in spite of the 
attraction of recovering honour and independence, refused to 
listen to the solicitations of England and Russia, and adhered to its 
feeble neutrality. Of the other German states Bavaria, Paden, 


588 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. XXIV. 


and Wurtemberg were allies of France. As far as effective opera- 
tions were concerned, the coalition consisted only of Austria and 
Russia. Sweden and Naples, which had joined secretly, could not 
make efforts on a great scale, and England was as yet content 
with providing subsidies and the invaluable services: of its fleet. 
It was arranged that one Austrian army under the archduke 
Charles should invade Lombardy, while Mack, with a second 
army and the aid of Russia, should occupy Bavaria and advance 
upon the Rhine. 

§ 16. Without paying any apparent attention to the storm that 
was gathering in the east, Napoleon seemed to have at last deter- 
mined on carrying out the projected invasion cf England. To 
ensure a successful passage it was necessary to have the whole 
naval force of France at hand, and, if possible, to secure the absence 
of the English fleet. Napoleon, in spite of his ignorance of mari- 
time war, mapped out a regular campaign, and might have been 
successful but that no allowance was made for accident. Admiral 
Villeneuve was ordered to sail with the Toulon squadron to the 
West Indies so as to entice Nelson in pursuit. As soon as the 
English fleet was well out of the way, he was to sail back with all 
possible speed and raise the blockade of Brest. That done, the 
French would be masters of the Channel, and a calm for twelve 
hours would bring them to the English coast. Napoleon had forced 
Spain into a new treaty (Dec. 1804) by which he could command 
the services of thirty Spanish vessels. The first part of the 
programme was successfully accomplished. Nelson was drawn to 
the West Indies, and while he was pursuing the French there, they 
were in full sail for Europe. But though Nelson discovered his 
error too late to arrive in time, a swift brig brought the news to 
the English government, and when Villeneuve arrived off Cape 
Finisterre he found Calder waiting for him with fifteen ships. 
The battle was not in itself very decisive, but it was enough to 
ruin Napoleon’s grand scheme. Villeneuve was shut out from 
the Channel and retired to Cadiz, the blockade of Brest was 
continued, and all possibility of a French invasion of England was 
at an end. 

§ 17. It was probably fortunate for Napoleon that the enter- 
prise was thus foiled at the start. He must have found more 
difficulty in conquering England than he had anticipated, and 
during his absence France would have been left to the mercy of 
Austria and Russia. So obvious are these considerations that his 
admirers have maintained that the project of invasion was a mere 
feint, and that the troops collected at Boulogne were never to act 
except against Austria. Documentary evidence makes this in- 


A.D. 1805. CAPITULATION OF ULM. 589 


credible, but it is certain that Napoleon was fully prepared for 
failure, and that he changed the destination of his army with a 
promptness that would have been impossible if the necessity had 
not been foreseen. He determined to crush the coalition before it 
had time to form itself. On the 1st of September the camp at 
Boulogne was broken up, and by the end of the month the “ grand 
army ” was in the Danube valley. The Austrians had begun the 
campaign by a leisurely occupation of Bavaria, so as to give the 
Russians time to join them. Mack had reached Ulm before he 
received any news of Napoleon’s movements, or even knew that he 
had left the coast. The French had met with no opposition in the 
territories of Baden and Wurtemberg, and had marched to the north 
of Ulm so as to cut off the Austrian retreat. At the same time the 
troops which had occupied Hanover marched in a parallel line 
under Bernadotte and joined the main army. Mack found himself 
hopelessly shut in, and on the 20th of October he was compelled 
to capitulate with all his troops. No such rapid and unexpected 
blow had ever been struck before, and it proved the utter folly of 
opposing to the genius of Bonaparte a respectable and learned 
strategist like Mack. But on the very next day France suffered a 
blow no less severe. Villeneuve had at last ventured out of Cadiz, 
and Nelson destroyed the combined French and Spanish fleets at 
Trafalgar (21 October)... The English admiral fell in the battle 
that set the seal upon, his glory and really completed the work for 
which he had lived. The maritime power of France was utterly 
crushed, and England was secure from any possibility of invasion. 
Napoleon had no means left of attacking the power which was the 
real leader of the opposition to his ambition, except by excluding 
English commerce from every country that he could influence. 
And this policy ultimately defeated its own ends, because it 
increased the sufferings of the subject peoples, and led them to 
welcome any deliverance from so oppressive a yoke. 

The capitulation of Ulm altered the whole character of the war. 
The advanced guard of the Russians, which Kutusow had already 
brought as far as the Inn, was compelled to retreat to join 
Alexander I. and the main army. The archduke John evacuated 
the Tyrol, and the archduke Charles, who had already commenced 
a campaign in Italy against Masséna, had to return to Hungary. 
Meanwhile the road to Vienna was left open to the French. 
Francis II. went to join the Czar, and Murat with his cavalry, 
after taking the bridge over the Danube by a dishonourable 
stratagem, occupied the Austrian capital on the 18th of November. 
Napoleon stayed for a short time at Schénbrunn and then marched 
to meet the enemy in Bohemia, where he took up his quarters at 


590 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. XXIV. 


Briinn. The coalition had recently been encouraged by the 
adhesion of a new member. Bernadotte’s division, on its march 
from Hanover, had coolly violated the neutrality of Prussia by 
passing through the territory of Anspach. This insult was too 
much even for Frederick William III., and he at last yielded to the 
entreaties of the war party at Berlin. ‘The catastrophe at Ulm 
rather cooled the ardour of the Prussian government, but a personal 
visit of Alexander effected the conclusion of the treaty of Potsdam 
(3 November). Prussia undertook to demand from Napoleon the 
evacuation of Piedmont, Switzerland, and Holland. But a month 
was to be allowed for negotiations; if at the end of that time the 
demands were refused, Prussia was to occupy Hanover and to send 
an army to aid the coalition. Haugwitz was entrusted with the 
negotiation, which he conducted with a half-hearted tardiness which 
testified to his disapproval of the abandonment of neutrality. The 
treaty with Prussia was a strong argument for the allies to delay 
their attack, aud if they had done so, it is probable that Napoleon 
would have been unable to maintain a position so far from his own 
country. The eager courage of the Czar and his officers refused to 
listen to the dictates of policy, and they determined to give battle 
on the ground which Napoleon had himself chosen before Briinn. 
At Austerlitz the “battle of the three emperors” took place on 
the 2nd of December. In spite of the superior numbers of the 
assailants, the admirable tactics of the French gave them the 
most complete victory that had been won in the whole course of 
European wars. ‘The Russians, who had suffered enormous losses, 
promptly retreated homewards, and Francis II. was compelled, two 
days after the battle, to accept an armistice which was a virtual 
surrender. The army of the archduke Charles was still intact in 
Hungary, but Austria had suffered two such crushing blows that 
resistance was no longer thought of. The coalition was prostrate 
at the feet of France, and its author, Pitt, already stricken by 
disease, could not survive the news of Austerlitz. He died on the 
23rd of January, 1806, and the government fell into the hands of 
his old rival, Fox, who strove to obliterate party differences by 
forming the “ ministry of all the talents.” 

§ 18. The presentation of the Prussian demands to Napoleon, and 
the union of Prussia with the coalition were now equally out of the 
question. But no one was prepared for the humiliating treaty 
which Haugwitz was bullied into signing at Schonbrunn (15 Dec.) 
without being allowed time to consult the home government. By 
this the principality of Neufchatel and the remaining portion of 
the duchy of Cleve were ceded to France, Anspach was given up to 
Bavaria, and Prussia was formally allied with France. In return 


a 


A.D. 1805. TREATY OF PRESSBURG. 591 


Prussia was to receive Hanover with the obligation to exclude 
English vessels from the harbours of the North Sea. The news of 
these shameful conditions arrived like a thunderbolt in Berlin, 
where negotiations were being carried on for the receipt of an 
English subsidy. But it was too late to make an effective protest, 
and Frederick William III. was compelled to ratify the act of his 
envoy, though he tried to persuade England that the occupation of 
Hanover was only a temporary measure until a final peace could be 
arranged. 

Still more shameful were the terms which Napoleon dictated 
through Talleyrand to the Austrian plenipotentiaries at Pressburg, 
and which were hurriedly accepted in the feverish desire to rid the 
country of its hated conquerors. By this treaty, which was signed 
on the 26th of December, Francis II. recognised Napoleon’s king- 
dom of Italy, and increased it by the surrender of Venice and the 
district which had been given to Austria at Campo Formio and 
Lunéville. In Germany even greater sacrifices had to be made to 
the French allies. Bavaria received the Tyrol with a considerable 
part of the border territories of Austria. The outlying provinces 
ef the Hapsburgs in western Germany, from which the family had 
originally sprung, were divided between Baden and Wurtemberg. 
All imperial authority over these three states was abandoned ; the 
electors of Bavaria and Wurtemberg were raised to the rank of 
kings; the elector of Baden assumed the title of grand-duke. 
Never had “fortunate” Austria been called upon to make such 
enormous sacrifices. In Italy, where the Hapsburgs had long been 
the dominant power, they had not a single fief left. The treaty 
deprived them of nearly three million subjects and a revenue of 
thirteen million gulden. The headship of the Empire, which the 
Hapsburgs had held since 1488, with the one interval of Charles 
VIL.’s reign, was no longer of any value even as a title, and before 
long was formally resigned. 

§ 19. The brilliance and completeness of his success seem to 
have turned Napoleon’s head. From this time he is possessed with 
the chimerical idea of forming an empire which should dominate 
the whole of Europe through a long chain of dependent kingdoms 
and principalities. ‘lhe model which he followed was his own con- 
ception of the feudal system, and the first step towards the reali- 
sation of his scheme was to find thrones for the members of his 
family, as the Hapsburgs and Bourbons had done in the past. He 
first turned his attention to Naples, which had incurred his enmity 
by joining the coalition. On the day after the treaty of Pressburg 
a proclamation was drawn up at Vienna which declared that the 
Neapolitan dynasty had ceased to reign. A French army was 


592 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. XXIV. 


despatched to carry out this imperious decree, and for the second 
time Ferdinand IV. and his wife were compelled to fly from their 
kingdom. Joseph Bonaparte was proclaimed king of the two 
Sicilies on the Ist of April. But his power was limited to Naples, 
as the presence of an English fleet made it impossible for the 
French to cross the straits of Messina into Sicily. Soon after- 
wards Holland received a monarchial constitution, with-Louis Bona- 
parte and Hortense Beauharnais as kmg and queen (June, 1806). 
Joachim Murat, the dashing cavalry officer who had married Caro- 
line Bonaparte, received the duchy of Berg, and Neufchatel was 
given to Berthier as the husband of a sister-in-law of Joseph Bona- 
parte. While he thus distributed states at his will, Napoleon 
suppressed one of the last relics of the revolution in France by 
abolishing the republican calendar on the Ist of January, 1806. 
Jerome Bonaparte, who had incurred his brother’s displeasure by 
marrying an American lady, was restored to favour on separating 
from his wife, raised to the princely rank, and re-married to a 
danghter of the elector of Wurtemberg. KEugéne Beauharnais, 
the viceroy of Italy, was betrothed to a daughter of the king of 
Bavaria. Out of the Venetian states twelve ducal fiefs were,carved 
for Napoleon’s marshals. 

§ 20. Of more permanent importance was Napoleon’s settle- 
ment of Germany, which was arranged by Talleyrand in private 
negotiation with the German princes. The Confederation of the 
Rhine was formally proclaimed on the 12th of July, 1806. By 
this act the kings of Bavaria and Wurtemberg, the archbishop of 
Mainz, the grand-duke of Baden, and eight lesser princes were 
declared to be separated from the empire and formed into a federa- 
tion under the protection of France. Dalberg, the archbishop of 
Mainz, and hitherto the arch-chancellor of Germany, who had 
taken the lead in the negotiations with Talleyrand, was appointed 
prince-primate of the Confederation. Frankfort was made the 
capital of the league, and there the diet was to meet and all 
federal business was to be transacted. The German knights or 
vitterschaft, the lesser tenants-in-chief of the empire, were now 
abolished. Their territories were declared to be mediatised, i.e. 
annexed to the larger provinces in which they were situated. The 
members of the Confederation were pledged to support the French 
emperor in all his wars with 70,000 troops. Austria, the titular 
leader of Germany, was powerless to resist the thinly-veiled domi- 
nation of France, and on the 6th of August the Roman Emperor, 
Francis II., became Francis I., Emperor of Austria. -An institu- 
tion which could trace its history back to Julius Cesar was over- 
thrown by the will of a Corsican usurper. 


A.D. 1806. ATTITUDE OF PRUSSIA. 593 


§ 21. But there was one state which even more than Austria 
might be regarded as the champion of German independence. 
In spite of the miserable part which Prussia had played for the 
last ten years, the traditions of the great Frederick had not been 
» wholly forgotten, An enthusiastic war-party at Berlin was headed 
by the popular queen, Louisa of Mecklenburg-Strelitz, and by 
Prince Lewis Ferdinand, a nephew of Frederick II. This. party 
had succeeded in bringing about the treaty of Potsdam, but the 
hopes then excited had been dashed to the ground by the battle of 
Austerlitz and the miserable treaty which Haugwitz had accepted 
at Schénbrunn. Since then Napoleon had treated Prussia almost 
as a vassal state. He adroitly involved her in a quarrel with 
England by the cession of Hanover. ‘To lull suspicion he suggested 
the formation of a North-German Confederation under Prussian 
headship, and then interposed obstacles which made it impossible. 
The Rhenish Confederation was organised without the slightest 
pretence of consulting Prussia. ‘These and other insults were 
bitterly resented at Berlin, but the final impulse to the vacillating 
government was given by the news of secret negotiations between 
England and France. The accession to the ministry of Fox, long 
the opponent of the French war, suggested to Napoleon the idea of 
coming to terms with England. It is doubtful whether this could 
have been effected, as Napoleon’s aggressions had become intoler- 
able, and Fox’s sympathies were with republican and not with 
imperial France. Atall events the negotiations were broken off by 
the minister’s death (13 Sept.) ; but meanwhile the Prussian envoy 
at Paris discovered that the bribe which had been offered to. Eng- 
land was the restoration of Hanover. ‘This intelligence that Prussia 
was to be quietly deprived of the one reward for its dishonour was 
too much for the pacific king and ministry. From this moment 
war with France was decided upon, and was formally declared on 
the 9th of October. But Prussia was now to pay the penalty of its 
previous selfishness. England and Russia were willing to forget 
their grievances against a country which would really fight against 
France, but neither could furnish immediate assistance. ‘The 
differences with Sweden were speedily settled, but Sweden now 
counted for little in Europe. Austria was too busy with repairing 
its recent losses to venture on another war, and remained neutral. 
Prussia was left without an ally to face a power that had crushed 
a formidable coalition. Under Frederick the Great such a task 
might not have been hopeless, but since his death Prussia had 
degenerated as rapidly as it had risen. Its greatness had been 
created by the genius of its rulers, and had perished with them. 
The whole edifice of the state was rotten at the foundation. The 

27 


594 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. xxv. 


ministers were mere heads of departments ; the king was surrounded 
by a cabinet of irresponsible courtiers. The army was formid- 
able in numbers, but in nothing else. ‘The officers were almost all 
aged men, trained in a school of tactics which was already obsolete. 
Many of the common soldiers had been recruited abroad and were 
inspired with no patriotic devotion to the country which they 
served. Even the native troops consisted mainly of oppressed 
and down-trodden serfs who were really little better than merce- 
naries. Nevertheless, the old confidence which Frederick II. had 
inspired had not yet been overthrown, and victory was regarded 
as inevitable. ‘The supreme command was entrusted to Bruns- 
wick, the author of the famous manifesto of 1792, and it was 
determined to advance against the French, instead of waiting to 
defend the line of the Elbe. 

§ 22. The armies with which Napoleon had overthrown the 
Austrians and Russians had not yet been recalled from Germany, 
so that it was easy to give a prompt and decisive answer to the 
Prussian manifesto. The Prussian forces were collected near the 
Thuringian forest when the French advanced against them with 
superior numbers. At Saalfeld the latter showed their superiority 
in a small skirmish which was fatal to Prince Lewis Ferdinand, 
“the Prussian Alcibiades.” Brunswick, alarmed by the presence 
of the French emperor in person, changed his plans at the last 
moment, and retreated towards Magdeburg, leaving the left wing 
under Hohenlohe to hold Jena as long as he could. The result 
was that when Napoleon arrived at Jena with his splendid army 
he found himself confronted by a small division, instead of, as he 
expected, by the united forces of Prussia. Hohenlohe was, of 
course, utterly crushed by the enormously superior numbers of the 
enemy (14 Oct.). On the same day a French detachment under 
Davoust fell in with Brunswick’s army and defeated it at Auer- 
stadt. As the Prussians were retreating in good order they fell 
in with the fugitives from Jena, a sudden panic seized the whole 
army, and the retreat became a hopeless rout. This double battle 
was even more decisive than Austerlitz. The Prussian monarchy 
scemed for the moment to be annihilated. And the spirit which 
was shown after the defeat was still more lamentable and 
disgraceful than the defeat itself. The commanders of the chief 
fortresses seemed to compete with cach other in their haste to 
surrender their charges. Erfurt, Halle, Ciistrin, Spandau, Berlin, 
etc., opened their gates in rapid succession. On’ October 28 
Hohenlohe capitulated with the remnant of the army of Jena. 
The only courageous stand was made by Bliicher, who fought every 
point as he retreated, held out in Liibeck till the town was taken 


A.D. 1806. THE BERLIN DECREE. 595 


by storm, and refused to surrender until the superior numbers of 
his pursuers threatened to drive him into the Baltic. The whole of 
Brandenburg was in the hands of the French. Frederick William III. 
tried to arrange a peace, or at least an armistice. But Napoleon’s 
terms, which were moderate after Jena, rose to extremes as the 
weakness of Prussia became more and more manifest. Lucchesini, 
the Prussian envoy, went so far as to sign a convention by which 
all the fortresses still uncaptured were to be surrendered. But the 
king, whose character improved with adversity, refused to ratify an 
act which amounted to an abdication of his crown, and retreated 
into East Prussia so as to carry on the war with the help of Russia. 
This worthy decision involved the resignation of Haugwitz, whose 
feeble truckling to France was one of the chief causes of the evils 
that had befallen Prussia. But even yet Frederick William could 
not be induced to entrust the power to Stein, the one minister who 
commanded the confidence of the nation. Stein irritated the king 
by protesting against the existence of a cabinet from which the 
ministers were excluded, and was dismissed from the department 
of finances. Foreign affairs were entrusted to Zastrow, another 
incompetent politician of the same school as Haugwitz. 

§ 23. Napoleon’s success must have been. marvellous even to 
himself, and was ill-calculated to diminish the haughtiness with 
which he dictated his will to Europe. Northern Germany was 
now at his feet, and was treated: with the same disregard of all but 
personal interests as the Southern States had been. The rulers of 
Hesse-Cassel and Brunswick were deposed, and their territories 
formed into the kingdom of Westphalia. The elector of Saxony, 
Frederick Augustus, purchased pardon for his very half-hearted 
hostility by joining the Confederation of the Rhine, for which he 
was rewarded with the title of king. The small states of Thuringia, 
Weimar, Gotha, Meiningen, and Coburg followed the example of 
their more powerful neighbour, and thus escaped the vengeance of 
the conqueror. On the 21st of November Napoleon issued a decree 
from Berlin which announced to the astonished world the ultimate 
object of that conquest of Hurope on which he had now set his 
heart. He could not rest till he had humiliated England, the 
one country which was safe from his invincible armies, and 
he determined to accomplish his aim by the destruction of its 
commerce. The Berlin decree declared the British Isles in a state 
of blockade, ordered the confiscation of all British merchandise, 
and forbade all the countries that were dependent upon France 
to carry on any trade whatever with Great Britain. Thus was 
founded what was known as the “continental system,” the most 
stupendous proof of Napoleon’s incapacity as a statesman, and 


596 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. XXIV. 


destined to bring about the collapse of his empire. The policy was 
based upon the idea that every subject and every ally of the French 
Emperor was willing to sacritice the most pressing material interests 
to enable him to wreak his personal vengeance upon a nation that 
had dared to thwart his will. It was quite true that England had 
exercised her maritime supremacy with scanty regard to the inte- 
rests or the rights of other countries, that the rights of search and 
of blockade were employed with irritating severity ; but these 
evils were trifling compared to the deprivation of necessaries which 
was brought about by Napoleon’s measures. The results of the 
decree were not fully appreciated until England began to retali- 
ate. By four successive Orders in Council (Jan. to Nov. 1807) the 
English government forbade vessels to trade with ports belonging 
to France or her dependent allies, authorised reprisals against those 
countries which had seized English property, declared the blockade 
of all ports from which the English flag was excluded, and made it 
illegal for a neutral to sell ships to a belligerent power. ‘The policy 
of these orders has been severely criticised, and it is certain that 
they did a great deal to irritate the United States against England. 
But they were certainly justified by the measures of Napoleon, and 
they were politic in so far as they increased the hostility of the 
subject populations to the rule of France. 

§ 24. The elder Pitt announced in the Seven Years’ War that he 
would conquer France in America: Napoleon now ventured on the 
counter-declaration that he would conquer England on the continent. 
But to do this he must complete the reduction of Europe, and as 
yet his power in Northern Germany was bounded by the Vistula. 
To this river Napoleon advanced directly after the Berlin decree, 
and prepared for a campaign in Hast Prussia, where Frederick 
William was determined to make a last struggle with the help of 
Russia. By artfully worded bulletins and proclamations, Napoleon 
inspired the Poles with the belief that he intended to restore their 
independence. ‘Thousands of the oppressed nation rallied to his 
standard, and the name of the great patriot Kosciusko was employed 
to fan hopes which were destined to speedy disappointment. For some 
time the war was confined to isolated skirmishes about the Vistula, 
in which the French on the whole maintained their superiority. The 
first pitched battle was fought at Eylau (8 February, 1807), where 
Napoleon met the main Russian army under Bennigsen, and found 
that he had to deal with a very different enemy from any that he 
had yet encountered. After an obstinate engagement, in which 
the Russians met the French attack with unflinching stubbornness, 
both armies remained in their positions. On the third day Ben- 
nigsen determined to retreat, but Napoleon also thought it prudent 


A.D. 1807. INTERVIEW AT TILSIT. 597 


to retire until he could obtain reinforcements. The French now 
contented themselves with reducing the Prussian fortresses that 
still held out. Danzig and Kolberg surrendered after a vigorous 
resistance on the part of the garrisons. If England had taken 
energetic measures at this juncture, and had sent a fleet into the 
Baltic to relieve these fortresses, the result of the war might have 
been altered. But the Grenville ministry, which was now in 
power, was incapable of apprehending the situation, and preferred 
to fritter away the resources of the country in futile expeditions to 
Buenos Ayres, the Dardanelles, Egypt and Sicily. In March 
Grenville was dismissed by the king for supporting the demand for 
Catholic emancipation, and Portland formed a ministry, composed 
for the most part of the followers of Pitt. Foreign affairs were 
placed in the hands of the youthful Canning, who was eager to 
repair the errors of his predecessors. One of his first acts was to 
accept the treaty of Bartenstein (April, 1807) by which the rulers 
of Russia, Prussia, and Sweden pledged themselves to carry on the 
war until a satisfactory arrangement of European affairs could be 
concluded. England now set to work to prepare for the Baltic 
expedition, but before the fleet was ready to start the revived 
coalition had unexpectedly collapsed. 

§ 25. Before resuming his advance against an enemy whom he 
had learnt to respect at Eylau, Napoleon was careful to collect 
reinforcements from every quarter, until he had at last 140,000 
men at his disposal. A march upon Kénigsberg, the capital of 
East Prussia, compelled Bennigsen to fight a battle at Friedland 
(14 June). The encounter was as desperate and costly as at Eylau. 
The Russians were almost decimated, and the French suffered 
enormous losses, but the superior numbers of the latter gave them 
the victory, and Kéonigsberg was taken. The Russians retired 
behind the Niemen, and a few days later an armistice put an end 
to active hostilities. Alexander I. now determined to negotiate 
in person with the rival emperor, and on the 25th of June the 
two sovereigns met at Tilsit, on a raft which was moored in the 
middle of the Niemen. The details of the conference are a secret, 
as Napoleon’s subsequent account of it is untrustworthy, “nd no 
witnesses were present. All that is certain is that Alexander LI., 
whose character was a curious mixture of nobility and weak- 
ness, was completely won over by his conqueror. Napoleon seized 
the opportunity of realising the hopes that had been destroyed by 
Paul I.’s assassination. Instead of attempting to impose extreme 
terms upon a country which it was impossible to conquer, he 
offered to share with Russia the supremacy in Europe which had 
been won by French arms. ‘The only conditions were the aban- 


598 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP, XXIV. 


donment of the cause of the old monarchies, which seemed hope- 
less, and an alliance with France against England. Alexander had 
several grievances against the English government, especially the 
lukewarm support that had been given in recent operations, and 
made no objection to resume the policy of his predecessors in this 
respect. ‘Two interviews sufficed to arrange the basis of an agree- 
ment. Both sovereigns abandoned their allies without scruple. 
Alexander gave up Prussia and Sweden, while Napoleon deserted 
the cause of the Poles, who had trusted to his zeal for their inde- 
pendence, and of the Turks, whom his envoy had recently induced 
to make war upon Russia. The treaty of Tilsit was speedily drawn 
up; on the 7th of July peace was signed between France and 
Russia, on the 9th between France and Prussia. Frederick William 
III. had to resign the whole of his kingdom west of the Elbe, 
together with all the acquisitions which Prussia had made in the 
second and third partitions of Poland. The provinces that were 
left, amounting to barely half of what he had inherited, were 
burthened with the payment of an enormous sum as compensation 
to France. The district west of the Elbe was united with Hesse- 
Cassel, Brunswick, and ultimately with Hanover, to form the king- 
dom of Westphalia, which was given to Napoleon’s youngest 
brother, Jerome. Of Polish Prussia one province, Bialystock, was 
added to Russia, and the rest was made into the grand duchy of 
Warsaw and transferred to Saxony. Danzig, with the surrounding 
territory, was declared a free state under Prussian and Saxon 
protection, but it was really subject to France, and remained a 
centre of French power on the Baltic. All trade between Prussia 
and England was cut off. Alexander I., on his side, recognised all 
Napoleon’s new creations in Hurope—the Confederation of the 
Rhine, the kingdoms of Italy, Naples, Holland, and Westphalia, 
and undertook to mediate between France and England. But the 
really important agreement between France and Russia was to be 
found, not in the formal treaties, but in the secret conventions 
which were arranged by the two emperors. The exact text of 
these has never been made public, and it is probable that some of 
the terms rested upon verbal rather than on written understandings, 
but the general drift of them is unquestionable. The bribe offered 
to Alexander was the aggrandisement of Russia in the East. To 
make him an aceomplice in the acts of Napoleon, he was to be 
allowed to annex Finland from Sweden, and Moldavia and Wallachia 
from Turkey. With regard to England, Russia undertook to adopt 
Napoleon’s blockade-system, and to obtain the adhesion of those 
states which still remained open to English trade—Sweden, Den- 
mark, and Portugal. 


A.D. 1807. TREATY OF TILSIT. | 599 


§ 26. Never were the liberties of Europe more directly threat- 
ened than by this union of the two representatives of despotic rule. 
But fortunately light appeared in the moment of the most extreme 
darkness. The task, which kings and princes had found too 
difficult, was undertaken by the peoples, and popular resistance 
proved a force which even Napoleon’s genius could not quell. 
Prussia, under the ministry of Stein, set the example of a regenera- 
tion which was destined to have the most important results, and 
for which the previous humiliations provided the necessary impulse. 
And there was one state, England, which was enabled by its insular 
position to maintain the cause of Europe when the continental 
thrones were falling in ruins. The English minister had obtained 
information of the secret agreement at Tilsit, and used it to strike 
an unexpected blow. France and Russia had determined to seize 
upon the Danish navy, and to employ it for their own purposes. 
But an English fleet appeared before Copenhagen, and demanded 
that all vessels should be handed over until the conclusion of the 
war. <A three days’ bombardment compelled the Danish Govern- 
ment to accede to the demand. It was a high-handed act, which 
could only be justified by the greatness of the danger, and by the 
necessity of fighting Napoleon with his own weapons. Denmark 
was naturally driven into a close alliance with France, but the two 
emperors were disagreeably reminded of the existence of a power 
which they could not even attack. Meanwhile the other Scandin- 
avian power, Sweden, was left at the mercy of the robbers of Tilsit. 
Russian troops overran Finland, but Gustavus IV. refused to nego- 
tiate even when the enemy was at the gate of his capital. At 
last the Swedes, disgusted with an obstinacy that was akin to 
madness, and which did nothing to defend them, determined to 
depose Gustavus (1809), and gave the crown to his uncle, Charles 
XIII. <A treaty was now concluded by which Finland was sur- 
rendered to Russia, but Sweden recovered its possessions in 
Pomerania on condition of closing its ports to English vessels. 
With Charles XIII. the great house of Vasa came to an end, 
and his successor was found in the French Marshal, Bernadotte. 
Napoleon gave an unwilling consent to the elevation of a man 
whose ability and independence he had always distrusted; and 
thus was founded the only one of the Napoleonic dynasties which 
was destined to have any permanence. 


III. Tue Pentrysuntar War. CAMPAIGN oF 1809 AGAINST AUSTRIA. 


§ 27. Napoleon was at the very zenith of his power when he 
returned from ‘Tlilsit to France, and he was received with an adula- 
tion proportioned to the greatness of his achievements. His first 


600 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. xxry. 


act was to create an imperial nobility which should revive the forms 
of the old monarchy, and to abolish the Tribunate, the last body 
that had the power, though not the will, to criticise his actions. 
But his chief object was to complete the humiliation of England by 
excluding her vessels from every port of Europe. The only country 
which had not adopted the continental system was Portugal, 
which was now governed by a Prince Regent, John, on behalf of 
his mother Maria, who bore the title of queen. As early as 1801, 
during the Consulate, he had compelled Spain to attack Portugal, 
and had thus extorted the closing of the ports of that country. But 
in 1804, on the renewal of the English war, he had allowed the 
Portuguese to purchase a formal recognition of their neutrality by 
the payment of sixteen million francs. Since then the trade with 
England, which was necessary for the very existence of the king- 
dom, had continued without interruption. This treaty Napoleon 
was determined to revoke, and at the same time to conquer Portugal. 
His motive was a desire to annex Tuscany to his kingdom of Italy, 
and to find some compensation elsewhere for the titular king of 
Ktruria. Accordingly, he demanded not only the closing of the 
ports, but also that the Portuguese government should declare war 
upon England and seize all Inglish subjects and property in the 
kingdom. On the first symptoms of hesitation to accept such 
ruinous terms, he ordered Junot to advance with an army which 
had already been collected on the Spanish frontier. At the same 
time he compelled Godoy, the Spanish minister, to sign the treaty 
of Fontainebleau (27 Oct., 1807), which arranged for a partition 
of Portugal. The northern districts, with the title of Northern 
Lusitania, were to be given to the young king of Etruria, who 
was to surrender Tuscany to the Italian kingdom. In the south a 
principality was to be carved out for Godoy himself. The central 
provinces were to be kept by France in pledge until the conclusion 
of a general peace. Half of the Portuguese colonies were to go to 
the king of Spain, who was to adopt the title of “ Emperor of the 
two Indies.” Meanwhile Junot was marching eastwards with a 
rapidity that reduced his troops to the greatest straits, and at the 
end of their journey they were barely able to carry their arms. 
Luckily for them they had no enemy to encounter. The Prince 
Regent never dreamed of opposing the French, and as soon as they 
approached the capital he set sail for Brazil with the court and 
some 15,000 loyal followers (29 Nov.). Half of the English fleet 
escorted them, while the other half remained to blockade the mouth 
of the Tagus. On the following day Junot entered Lisbon, and 
proceeded to take possession of the kingdom. Napoleon announced 
in a formal decree that “the house of Braganza has ceased to reign.” 


A.D. 1807. SPAIN. 601 


§ 28. This rapid success in Portugal was not enough for the 
French Emperor, who had also designs upon Spain. Ever since 
1796 Charles IV., under the influence of Godoy, had been the obe- 
dient vassal of France. And this vassalage had brought nothing but 
disaster to Spain. In tho battles of Cape Finisterre and Trafalgar 
the Spanish navy had been annihilated. At Amiens Napoleon had 
allowed England to take Trinidad, and since then that country 
had seized Buenos Ayres. For a long time Spain had depended 
upon the precious metals of Mexico and Peru, and now these 
resources s.emed likely to be cut off. Only once had Napoleon 
the slightest complaint to make. At a time when English hos- 
tility was more than usually ruinous, and when the coalition was 
strengthened by the adhesion of Prussia, Godoy had dreamed for a 
moment of throwing off the yoke, and had gone so far as to issue a 
belligerent proclamation. But the dream was rudely shattered at 
Jena, and Napoleon had condoned the offence in the treaty of Fon- 
tainebleau. In spite of all this Napoleon was determined to attack 
Spain, and he only waited to find a pretext for hostilities in internal 
quarrels. Godoy, who was known to be the paramour of the queen, 
was bitterly hated by the people for the disasters which his policy had 
brought upon Spain. At the head of the opposition to the favourite 
stood the crown prince Ferdinand, as insignificant a creature as his 
rival, but endowed with all good qualities by the popular favour. 
Godoy, conscious of the insecurity of his position, did all he could 
to secure the support of Napoleon, and this explains the abject servi- 
tude of the government to France. At last Ferdinand, who was 
regarded as the opponent of the French policy, determined to imi- 
tate his enemy, and also became a suitor for the emperor’s favour. 
He entered into secret relations with the French ambassador, 
Beauharnais, and went so far as to demand the hand of a Bonaparte 
princess. Napoleon readily encouraged a proposal that offered to 
make him arbiter of the court quarrels of Madrid. The decisive 
moment seemed to have come, when Godoy, who had discovered 
some of the intrigue against himself, obtained from the feeble 
Charles IV. an order for his son’s arrest. French troops under 
Dupont were ordered to enter Spain under pretence of supporting 
Junot, and great efforts were made to mass reinforcements on the 
frontier. But the moment that Ferdinand’s relations with Napoleon 
were discovered, Godoy hastened to patch up a reconciliation. The 
pretext for an invasion was thus removed, but Napoleon determined 
to proceed with his enterprise. The French soldiers were eagerly 
welcomed by the natives, who fondly imagined that they had come 
to espouse the prince’s cause against Godoy. Charles IV. wrote to 
demand an explanation of this hostile demonstration, but received 

pi As 


602 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. XXIV. 


a threatening answer, and Napoleon adroitly removed to Italy 
to escape further remonstrance. ‘Thence he despatched Murat in 
February, 1808, to take command of the army, which had already 
occupied the northern provinces of Spain. He gave no hint of his 
real designs, and Murat felt convinced that the crown of the 
Bourbons was destined for himself. As the French continued to 
advance upon Madrid, and resistance was out of the question, 
Charles IV. and Godoy determined upon flight. The news of this 
intention roused the smouldering passions of the people. Risings 
took place at Aranjuez and Madrid, Godoy was maltreated, 
and Charles IV. was compelled to abdicate in favour of the 
unworthy idol of the populace, Ferdinand. For the second time 
the position of the French underwent a sudden and unexpected 
alteration, but Murat proceeded with a caution worthy of the 
great personal interests which he believed to be involved. He 
obtained from Charles IV. a secret declaration that his abdica- 
tion had been compulsory and invalid, and he occupied Madrid 
(23 March) without in any way acknowledging the title of Ferdi- 
nand. Meanwhile Napoleon had matured his own plans. Advanc- 
ing in person to the frontier, he sent Savary, the principal agent 
in the murder of Enghien, to act as his agent at Madrid. Savary 
persuaded Ferdinand that Napoleon was entering Spain, and that 
the best chance of securing his crown was to meet the emperor at 
Burgos. At Burgos the ill-fated victim was lured on to Bayonne, 
where he found himself a French prisoner and was suddenly con- 
fronted with his parents and Godoy. After a dogged resistance, 
he was intimidated into restoring his crown to his father (5 June), 
who at once made a second abdication. ‘I’o the intense chagrin 
of Murat, Napoleon at last announced his real intentions. A 
meagre assembly of notables was convened at Bayonne, and was 
compelled to offer the vacant crown to Joseph Bonaparte, who had 
been summoned for the purpose from Naples, and who was speedily 
installed at Madrid. 

§ 29. But before this the Spaniards had discovered that they 
had been duped, and had risen with the courage of despair against 
their treacherous invaders. Loyalty in Spain was a superstition 
rather than a sentiment, and in spite of the unworthy character of 
Ferdinand the popular devotion to him knew no bounds. In every 
province juntas were formed to direct the military movements, and 
in a short time the insurrection had spread to every quarter of the 
kingdom. It was the first time that Napoleon had had to face an 
infuriated people, and he regarded the novel phenomenon with the 
contempt of ignorance. He determined to make Madrid the centre 
of operations, and to send a series of simultaneous expeditions 


- a =. 
i 


Se ae 


A.D. 1808, THE PENINSULAR WAR. ~~ 608 


against each of the revolted provinces. The task of subduing a 
disorderly and inexperienced mob might safely be entrusted to the 
less prominent of his generals. At first events seemed to justify 
his calculations. Bessieres defeated the insurgents at Rio Leco, 
near Valladolid, and thus secured the roads from the Pyrenees to 
Madrid (13 July). This success seemed to Napoleon decisive, but 
he overestimated the importance of the capital. Madrid had never 
been a capital in the same sense as Paris, and its military importance 
was of the slightest. The provincial revolts went on unchecked, 
the French were repulsed in Valencia, and Dupont, who had 
advanced into the heart of Andalusia, was compelled to retreat and 
ultimately to capitulate with all his forces at Baylen (19 July). 
The Spaniards now advanced upon Madrid, and Joseph had to fly 
from the capital which he had only just entered. 

§ 30. At the same time disasters befel the French in Portugal. 
On the 1st of August an English force landed at Figueras under 
Sir Arthur Wellesley, and at once marched to attack Junot at 
Lisbon. At Vimeira the first battle of the Peninsular war was 
fought, and the English won their first victory upon the mainland 
(21 August). The French army was now surrounded and might 
easily have been annihilated, but at this juncture Wellesley was 
superseded by his superior officer, Sir Harry Burrard, who opened 
negotiations with Junot. By the Convention of Cintra (30 August) 
the French agreed to evacuate Portugal, but stipulated that they 
should be conveyed to France in English ships. The conven- 
tion was bitterly censured by the English government, which was 
already preparing to send help to the insurgents in Spain. At last 
Napoleon was convinced of the serious nature of affairs in the penin- 
sula, and determined to remedy matters by his personal presence. 
But before he could undertake the journey in safety, it was neces- 
sary to settle matters in central Europe, which were beginning to 
assume a threatening aspect. 

§ 31. The year which followed the treaty of Tilsit was a period 
of supreme importance in the history of Prussia. Napoleon had 
insisted on the dismissal of Hardenberg from the ministry, and his 
place was taken by Stein, who received the fullest powers to effect 
the reorganisation of the administrative system. Never was a 
country in a more abject state: reduced to half its extent, and 
deprived of almost all resources to pay the indemnity, Prussia had 
still to support an enormous number of French troops, who found 
one pretext after another to postpone their promised evacuation. 
In all probability it was only a regard for the susceptibilities of 
Russia that prevented Napoleon from utterly destroying the con- 
quered kingdom. In these terrible circumstances Stein undertook 


604 } * MODERN EUROPE. Cap. xxiv. 


the task of government with a resolute confidence that extorted the 
wonder and admiration of his contemporaries. He saw clearly that 
the root of the evil lay not so much in the maladministration, bad 
as that had been, as in the whole social structure of the system. 
The Prussian government had been carefully organised so as to sup- 
press all freedom among the subjects, and to make them passive 
agents of a despotic will. Not only were there three classes—nobles, 
citizens, and peasants—which were absolutely cut off from each 
other from birth to death; the land was divided in the same way 
and was equally immutable. ‘lhe citizens were comparatively free 
from military service, and were supposed to devote their energies 
to enriching the country. ‘The nobles supplied the officers in the 
army and the peasants the common soldiers. The peasants were in 
a condition of serfdom which had passed away from almost every 
civilised country in Europe. Neither citizens nor peasants had any 
self-government, or, it is needless to say, a voice in the direction 
of the state. The absolute want of any knowledge of, or interest 
in, public affairs was to Stein one of the most grievous defects of 
Prussia, and was in itself sufficient to explain the abject inertness 
with which the invaders had been received. 

Stein took office on the 4th of October, 1807, and on the 9th was 
issued the famous Emancipating Edict, the greatest legislative work 
of the period. Perfect freedom of trade in land was established, and 
the old distinction between noble-land, burgher-land, and peasant- 
land was abolished. ‘The system of caste was done away with, hence- 
forth noble, citizen and peasant might follow any occupation they 
chose, and a man might pass freely from one class to another. No 
new relation of serfdom could be created after the date of the edict, 
and at Martinmas, 1810, all existing serfs were to become free. 
The edict did not, as has been so often represented, convert the 
villein into a peasant-proprietor, but left him a free tenant of his 
lord. ‘The further change was the work of Hardenberg, who in 
1811 gave the peasants absolute possession of two-thirds of their 
holdings, and allowed the lord to take the other third as compen- 
sation. Neither Stein nor Hardenberg ventured to interfere with 
the judicial functions of the noble class, and these survived until 
1848. 

This great edict, though it is identified with Stein’s name, was 
not really his work, as the main outlines of the reform had been 
already drawn up by a commission appointed under Hardenberg. 
Still less direct- share was taken by the minister in the military 
reforms which were carried through by his colleague, Scharnhorst. 
‘These reforms were really only sketches of what was to be effected 
in the future, as at the time want of supplies an the presence of 


A.D. 1808. REFORMS IN PRUSSIA. 605 


the French army prevented the adoption of military reform on a 
large scale. Scharnhorst proposed to form an active army of 40,000 
men, the number fixed at Tilsit, but to adopt a short term of ser- 
vice, and to draft the soldiers as soon as they were trained into 
the reserve. At the same time a Landwehr, or militia, was to be 
formed for defensive purposes only. ‘These reforms, accompanied by 
an abandonment of the obsolete tactics of Frederick the Great, and 
the abolition of the degrading punishments hitherto employed, did 
much to revive the military glory of Prussia. Scharnhorst himself 
did not live to see the result, as he was killed in one of the first 
battles of the War of Liberation, but the fruit of his labours was 
reaped by Bliicher and Gneisenau. 

Meanwhile, Stein was pursuing what was more especially his own 
scheme—the admission of the people to a voice in their own govern- 
ment. He reorganised the municipalities, and gave the citizens the 
right to choose their own magistrates and to regulate local affairs. 
He hoped to establish similar representative institutions in the 
country districts, and also for the whole kingdom; but neither time 
nor opportunity was allowed him. There was a strong feeling in 
Prussia that the erection of a parliament would lead to a Jacobin revo- 
lution, and the reforms already accomplished had provoked sufficient 
opposition. Moreover, foreign politics came to interrupt the course 
of domestic legislation. The revived national spirit which Stein had 
called into existence was violently hostile to France. The Tugend- 
bund and other secret societies spread themselves in a network over 
the country, and only waited for the opportunity for a rising. While 
opinion was in this excited state, the news of the Spanish successes 
made a profound impression. And Napoleon had now decided to 
recall his army of occupation from Germany in order to throw over- 
whelming forces into Spain. But at the same time he determined 
to impose fresh terms upon Prussia that should remove all danger 
of a rising behind his back. ‘The indemnity still due was to be 
fixed at 140 million francs; until it was paid off 10,000 French 
troops were to occupy Glogau, Stettin, and Ciistrin at the expense 
of Prussia; for the next ten years the Prussian army was to be 
reduced to 42,000 men, and all idea of forming a militia was to be 
given up; and last, in case of a war with Austria, Prussia was to 
assist France with 16,000 men. Stein urged that a desperate war 
should beattempted before the acceptance of such humiliating 
terms. But Frederick William III. had not the courage to follow 
his minister’s advice, and the proposed convention was signed on 
the 10th of September, 1808. Napoleon had intercepted a letter 
of Stein’s in which the possibility of an alliance with Austria 
was discussed. He. peremptorily demanded the dismissal of a 


606 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. XXIV. 


minister whom he now recognised to be still more dangerous 
than Hardenberg. Again the humbled king gave way, and Stein 
went into exile. His place was taken for the next two years by 
Altenstein, who shared his views but was not strong enough to 
carry them out. 

§ 32. Prussia was not the only state in Germany which Napoleon 
had reason to fear. ‘The treaty of Pressburg had been far too hard 
a blow for Austria to be accepted as permanent. Under the able 
ministry of Count Stadion a number of reforms had been initiated, 
which, less sweeping than those of Stein, had yet given some 
semblance of national unity to the various races that owned the 
Hapsburg rule. At the same time the army was carefully reformed 
by the archduke Charles, and its numbers were vastly increased so 
as to be ready for the first opportunity. Napoleon complained 
bitterly of this hostile attitude, but he could do nothing until Spain 
had been recovered. Meanwhile, he determined to overawe Austria 
by a new demonstration of his good understanding with Russia, and 
he proposed a second meeting with Alexander IJ. at Erfurt. Of the 
bribes promised at ‘Tilsit the Czar had only obtained Finland, and 
he could not afford to separate from France until he had secured 
the Danubian principalities. ‘lhe proposed interview took place in 
October with the greatest pomp. All the vassal kings and princes 
of Germany came to pay court to their suzerain, and Goethe and 
Wieland were induced to visit Erfurt to give additional proofs of 
the slavery of their country. The promise of Wallachia and 
Moldavia was confirmed to Alexander, who undertook to continue 
his hostility against England, and to support France against 
Austria in case of war. 

§ 33. Convinced that the Erfurt Conference would preserve him 
from all danger in Central Europe, Napoleon hurried off to Spain. 
In spite of their great success at Baylen, the insurgents were not in 
an encouraging position. The local juntas had abdicated their 
authority in favour of a central junta which was to exercise 
supreme power. But the latter body contained thirty-four mem- 
bers, far too large a number for executive business, and displayed 
nothing but hesitation and incapacity. . The troops, about 130,000 
men, were extended over a long line from Bilbao to Saragossa, 
and it was easy for Napoleon to break through the centre and 
then crush the two wings. Blake, with the main body of the 
Spaniards, was defeated at Espinosa (10th Nov.), and only escaped 
annihilation by a fortunate accident. The centre of the line was 
forced by Soult’s capture of Burgos, and the left wing under 
Palafox, defeated at Tudela by Lannes, threw itself into Saragossa, 
In a week the Spanish army had disappeared from-the field, and 


A.D. 1808-1809. THE PENINSULAR WAR. 607 


Napoleon marched upon Madrid and restored Joseph to his capital. 
All this time an English force of 20,000 men, under Sir John 
Moore, had been marching, in spite of great obstacles, to the 
assistance of the Spaniards. On receiving the news of their utter 
defeat, he still hoped to strike a blow for the safety of Madrid. 
When he heard that the capital had fallen, he felt that nothing 
remained but retreat, but he determined to do something for his 
unfortunate allies by diverting French attention from southern 
Spain. He continued to advance against Soult’s division, and the 
news of this movement brought Napoleon from Madrid to crush 
the English. Sir John Moore retreated before superior numbers, 
and only the most speedy and exhausting marches saved him 
from destruction. At last Napoleon saw that the enemy must 
escape him, and, on the pretext of alarming news from Austria, 
left the army and the fruitless pursuit of the English to Soult. 
.QOn the 11th of January Moore reached Corunna, but found to his 
horror that his transports had not arrived. ‘The French at last 
overtook him and it was necessary to fight a desperate battle 
for safety. Soult’s attack was repulsed, the English forces were 
embarked, but Moore was left dead upon the field which he had so 
heroically held. Spain was now at the mercy of the French, as 
there were no forces that could meet them in the open field, and 
only small local risings remained to be put down. Saragossa made 
a desperate resistance, and was treated with proportionate barba- 
rity when it was finally taken (20 Feb.). The southern provinces 
were reduced by Victor, while Soult invaded Portugal and occupied 
Oporto (27 March, 1809). 

§ 34. Napoleon had quitted Spain partly because there was no 
more glory to be won there, and partly because his absence encou- 
raged the hostile schemes of Austria. There can be no doubt that 
the government of Vienna had determined to make war at the first 
favourable opportunity, and it was doubtful whether any better 
chance would be offered than a moment when 300,000 French troops 
were engaged in Spain and when Germany seemed on the verge of 
revolt. It was on German discontent that Count Stadion placed his 
chief reliance: he knew that the Confederation of the Rhine chafed 
against the foreign yoke, and that a single success would over- 
come the vacillation of Frederick William III. On the 9th of May 
Francis I. declared war against Bavaria. Three separate expeditions 
were set on foot under three archdukes. Charles commanded the 
main army in Germany, John led an expedition into Italy, and 
Ferdinand advanced into Poland to attack Warsaw. Welcome allies 
were found in the Tyrolese peasants, who had been subjected to Bava- 
ria by the peace of Pressburg, and who now rose as one man under 


608 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. xxrv. 


Andrew Hofer, an inn-keeper of the Passeyr valley. Everywhere 
the Austrians had the advantage of taking the aggressive. ‘lhe 
archduke Charles crossed the Inn and was enabled by an error on 
the part of Berthier to concentrate his forces at Ratisbon. John 
defeated the French under Kugéne Beaunarnais, who had none of his 
step-father’s generalship, at Sacile near Venice, and Ferdinand suc- 
ceeded in capturing Warsaw. But the favourable moment was lost 
through the invincible sluggishness of Charles, who might have 
crushed the I'rench under Berthier and Davoust before Napoleon 
had time to reach the scene of operations. ‘The emperor on his 
arrival speedily rectified the errors of his lieutenants. By a series 
of masterly manceuvres, unsurpassed in the history of war, he col- 
lected his scattered forces, and in a campaign of five days (18-22 
April), each of which was signalised by a French victory, he broke 
through the enemy’s line and drove the Austrians to make a hasty 
retreat in two divisions. Following up his success with character- 
istic decision he occupied Vienna on the 13thof May. ‘These events 
decided the campaigns in Poland and Italy. Warsaw was evacu- 
ated, and the archduke John had to hurry back through the 
mountains to the defence of his country, closely pursued by Eugéne. 
An attempted revolt in Prussia under Colonel Schill had degenerated 
into petty partisan warfare, which was ended by Schill’s defeat and 
death at Stralsund (25 May). 

The capture of Vienna by no means involved the submission of 
Austria. All the bridges over the Danube were broken down, the 
northern bank was occupied by the archduke Charles with a large 
army, and in its presence the passage of the river was a task of great 
difficulty and danger. Napoleon determined to make the attempt a 
little below Vienna, where the Danube is divided into two streams 
by the long island of Lobau. The southern and wider stream was 
crossed by a bridge of boats, and a flying bridge was thrown across 
from the island to the northern bank. There the French were 
attacked by the Austrians at the villages of Aspern and Essling 
(22 May). Without being exactly defeated, Napoleon found it im- 
possible to maintain his position on the northern bank, and had to 
withdraw his forces into the island of Lobau, which his artillery made 
impregnable. This reverse was hailed throughout Europe as a defeat, 
and the emperor was regarded as a close prisoner in his Danube for- 
tress. It was a critical moment in European history. Prussia only 
waited for a decisive Austrian success to declare against France. 
Westphalia was on the verge of revolt against the feebly oppressive 
rule of Jerome Bonaparte. The duke 6f Brunswick claimed the 
hereditary territories that the treaty of Tilsit had taken from him, 
and attacked the king of Saxony, who was the most submissive 


A.D. 1809. BATTLE OF WAGRAM. 609 


vassal of France. The heroism of Schill, futile as it had proved, 
had made a deep impression in Germany. Allattempts on the part 
of Bavarians and French to reduce Tyrol had been foiled by the 
obstinate courage of the peasants, aided by the mountainous country. 
Everything depended upon the success or failure of the French to 
effect the crossing of the Danube, and Napoleon fully comprehended 
the importance of the crisis. He collected reinforcements from the 
Italian army, strengthened the bridges over the southern channel 
which had broken down during the battle of Aspern, and finally he 
determined to bridge over the whole of the northern channel with 
rafts so that his army could’ manceuvre as well as on dry land. 
When all preparations had been made the great enterprise was 
carried out, and the Austrians were astounded to find that the 
enormous |'rench army had crossed to the left bank in a single 
night (4 July). For the next two days an obstinate battle was 
fought on the field of Wagram, and it was not till the evening 
of the 6th of July that the superior numbers of the French gave 
them the victory. But the victory was dearly bought, and 
had nothing in common with such decisive successes as those of 
Austerlitz and Jena. ‘The archduke Charles retreated in good 
order to Znaim in Moravia, where an armistice was concluded on 
the 12th. 

The battle of Wagram was followed by a complete change of 
Austrian policy. The championship of German national unity, so 
contrary to the Hapsburg traditions, was given up, and areturn was 
made to the old devotion to selfish interests. Before long Stadion 
retired from office, and his place was taken by Metternich, a 
skilful diplomatist, but utterly devoid of enthusiasm, and inspired 
only with hatred of revolutionary doctrines. The archduke Charles 
retired into private life, and the command of the army was under- 
taken by a commission presided over by Francis I. in person. 
There was now no obstacle in the way of peace with France, and the 
only question was what terms to arrange. By a sort of tacit under- 
standing this question was aliowed to depend upon the success or 
failure of the efforts which England was making in the Spanish 
peninsula and in central Europe. 

§ 35. In 1809 Wellesley was entrusted with the supreme com- 
mand of the English forces, and was also appointed generalissimo by 
the Portuguese government. His first task was to free Portugal 
from the French, and this was accomplished without difficulty. 
Soult, who had been instructed by Napoleon to plant the French 
banner on the walls of Lisbon, was forced to evacuate Oporto and 
to make a disastrous retreat into Spain. Wellesley now advanced 
by the valley of the Tagus upon Madrid, and the Spanish army 


610 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. xxiv. 


under Cuesta was ordered to co-operate with him. But the English 
general found his allies very untrustworthy; he was kept without 
information of the French movements, and Cuesta refused to-act 
except independently. Soult was able to throw his army between 
Wellesley and the Portuguese frontier and thus to ‘cut off his retreat. 
If the other French commanders had been prudent enough to avoid an 
engagement, the English would have been caught in a trap and must 
have been overwhelmed. Luckily for the invaders, Joseph, acting 
on the advice of Victor, decided to risk a battle at Talavera. The 
Spaniards fled in panic, but the obstinacy of the English soldiers 
gave them a victory (28 July), for which Wellesley was rewarded 
with the title of Viscount Wellington. But the victory was 
practically useless except as securing the army from destruction. 
Wellington could do nothing more for the Spaniards, whose conduct 
he bitterly complained of, and as the line of the Tagus was occupied 
by Soult, he had to retreat through the mountains into Portugal. 
This great expedition, on which the eyes of Europe had been fixed, 
ended in complete failure. 

§ 36. Still more conspicuous was the collapse of another expe- 
dition which had been prepared with great parade by the English, 
government. On the 27th of July, 1809, 245 men of war convoyed 
40,000 soldiers to the mouth of the Scheldt to attack Antwerp. 
The command was given to Lord Chatham, the elder brother of 
William Pitt, who proved lamentably incompetent. Valuable time 
was wasted in the capture of Flushing, while the French made 
Antwerp impregnable. ‘The army was decimated by fever in 
the swamps of Walcheren, and at last all but 15,000 men were 
recalled. More than 2000 of this luckless body had perished 
before the survivors were allowed to return. It was the most 
glaring proof that had yet been given of the incompetence of the 
English government to direct military operations. An army that 
might have interfered with decisive effect in Spain was thrown 
away in an ill-judged enterprise which was hopeless from the 
outset. 

§ 37. This double failure on the part of England settled the nego- 
tiations between France and Austria, and the treaty of Vienna was 
signed on the 14th of October. Salzburg, Berchtesgaden, and the 
district of the Inn were ceded to Bavaria. Western Galicia, which 
Austria had acquired in the third partition of Poland, with the city 
of Krakau, was added to the grand duchy of Warsaw. The provinces 
of Trieste, Friuli, Croatia, and other districts between the Adriatic 
and the Save were formed into the “ Illyrian Provinces ” under the 
direct rule of Napoleon himself. Not only did Austria lose 50,000 
square miles of territory and a population of four millions, she was 


A.D. 1809-1810. FRENCH ANNEX ATIONS. 611 


also cut off both from Germany and the Mediterranean. Her 
political importance and her commerce seemed to be utterly de- 
stroyed. The T'yrolese were rewarded for their devotion to the 
Hapsburgs by being left at the mercy of the conquerors. The 
peasants were compelled by overwhelming forces to submit, and the 
heroic Hofer was carried to Mantua and shot as a rebel. 

So far Napoleon’s power was apparently unshaken by the popular 
risings against him. But he had advanced no nearer to his dearest 
object, the destruction of England. ‘To effect this purpose he had no 
other means than the inclusion of every European country in the 
systematic blockade. It was for this he had attacked Portugal and 
deprived Austria of her ports, and he was now determined to remove 
every obstacle in the way of his designs. - In spite of the concordat, 
Pope Pius VII. had never accepted the position of a submissive 
vassal of France. He had refused to acknowledge the kings whom 
Napoleon had placed in Naples, to confirm the French bishops whom 
Napoleon had nominated, or to close his ports. against English 
vessels. In 1808 Napoleon had ordered his troops under Miollis to 
occupy Rome, and on the 17th of May, 1809, he issued a decree 
from his camp at Vienna, by which he confiscated the Papal States 
and reduced the Pope to the position of a simple bishop of Rome. 
As Pius VII. refused to submit to this arbitrary act, he was 
imprisoned, first in Grenoble and then in Savona, where he re- 
mained for the next three years. The courageous pope declined 
all offers of a revenue and a residence in Paris, and Napoleon was 
compelled to organise the Gallican church in practical indepen- 
dence of the papal authority. The Roman states were divided 
into three departments, and received institutions on the French 
model. 

This annexation was followed by others in 1810. Louis Bona- 
parte, king of Holland, had committed the unpardonable crime of 
preferring his subjects’ interests to those of his brother, and had 
tried to mitigate the rigour of the ruious blockade. In January 
he had to sign a treaty by which he surrendered Zealand and 
admitted French officials to the Dutch custom-houses. Finally, 
unable to endure the humiliations to which he was exposed, he 
resigned his crown altogether (1 July), and Holland was incorpo- 
rated with France. Soon afterwards the whole coast of North 
Germany, including Hamburg and most of the old Hanse towns, 
the duchy of Oldenburg, and part of the kingdom of Westphalia, 
was formally annexed by Napoleon in order to effectually close the 
Elbe and the Weser against English commerce. 

§ 38. Napoleon now revived the idea which he had often enter- 
tained before, of allying himself with one of the great ruling families. 


612 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. XXIv, 


A compliant senate and a packed ecclesiastical council pronounced 
his separation from Josephine Beauharnais, who retired with a 
magnificent pension to Malmaison, where she died. As previous 
marriage proposals to the Russian court had not been cordially 
received, Napoleon now turned to Austria. The matter was 
speedily arranged with Metternich, and in March, 1810, the arch- 
duchess Maria Louisa arrived in France as the emperor’s wife. 
The great importance of the marriage was that it broke the last 
links which bound Russia to France, and thus overthrew the 
alliance of 'Tilsit. Alexander had been exasperated by the addition 
of Western Galicia to the grand-duchy of Warsaw, which he 
regarded as a step towards the restoration of Poland, and therefore 
as a breach of the engagement made at Tilsit. The annexation of 
Oldenburg, whose duke was-a relative of the Czar, was a distinct 
personal insult. Alexander showed his irritation by formally 
deserting the continental system, which was more ruinous to Russia 
than to almost any other country, and by throwing his ports open 
to British commerce (Dec. 1810), From this moment war between 
France and Russia was inevitable, unless Napoleon would resign the 
great object to which he had so long subordinated all other aims. 
But before considering this quarrel it is necessary to trace the course 
of the war in the Spanish peninsula. 

§ 39. The retreat of Wellington to Portugal after his victory at 
Talavera left Spain at the mercy of the French. In spite of the 
harassing guerilla warfare, in which the Spaniards excelled, they 
succeeded in capturing Granada and Seville, and finally reduced the 
whole of the southern provinces except Cadiz, which now became 
the capital of independent Spain. The treaty of Vienna allowed 
Napoleon to send reinforcements to the peninsula, and if he had 
appeared in person the war would probably have come to a speedy 
end. But he underrated the military power of England, and pre- 
ferred to leave the task to his marshals, while he occupied himself 
with the annexation of Holland and northern Germany and inces- 
sant squabbles with the imprisoned Pope. The progress of the French 
in Spain was impeded by the jealousy with which the marshals 
regarded each other, and by the want of sympathy between Napoleon 
and his brother. Joseph wished to restore peace and order to his 
subjects and to rule them as an independent nation, while Napoleon 
was determined to annex the peninsula to his own overgrown empire. 
These disputes went so far that Joseph resigned his crown, and was 
with great difficulty induced to resume it. Among the Spaniards 
the fall of the old monarchy, and the consciousness that the nation 
was conducting the war on its own behalf, had given a great im- 
pulse to the reforming party, which had long existed, but had been 


A.D. 1810. THE PENINSULAR WAR. 613 


reduced to powerlessness under Charles IV. The central junta at 
Seville had promised to summon the Cortes, but that body was 
suppressed by the French advance before the promise was fulfilled. 
But at Cadiz, the last bulwark of independence, the Cortes at last 
came together in 1810 and set to work to draw up a new consti- 
tution. The liberals had matters their own way, and the principles 
of the French Constituent Assembly were closely followed in the 
constitution which was promulgated early in 1812. Supreme legis- 
lative power was placed in the hands of a single national assembly, 
and effective checks were imposed to restrict the executive power 
of the monarchy whenever it should be restored. The freedom of 
the press was established, the old feudal rights of the nobles were 
abolished, tithes were remitted, and the property of the clergy was 
confiscated to defray the expenses of the war. But the great defect 
of the constitution was that it was the work of one party to which 
circumstances had given a temporary supremacy, and it failed to 
command the support of the united nation. The nobles and priests 
were bitterly hostile to the reforms, and the latter class had far more 
influence in Spain than they had ever enjoyed in France. More- 
over, the democratic character of the constitution was not likely to 
commend itself to Wellington, and the liberal leaders viewed with 
mistrust the conservative general to whom they were compelled to 
confide the defence of their country. 

§ 40. In 1810 Napoleon determined to bring the peninsular war, 
the only one now left on his hands, to a close. He ordered Soult to 
conduct the operations against Cadiz, while Masséna undertook the 
more difficult task of driving the English from Portugal. Wellington 
had foreseen this attack, and had employed the winter in erecting 
the impregnable lines of Torres Vedras, exteuding from the ‘agus to 
the sea. His intention was to stand strictly on the defensive and to 
compel the enemy’s retreat by devastating the open country before 
his lines. He made no attempt to defend the great fortress of 
Ciudad Rodrigo, the key of the northern route from Spain to 
Portugal, which was taken by the French on the 11th of July. 
The cowardice of the people and the incompetence of the regency in 
Lisbon compelled Wellington to depart from his programme so far 
as to fight a battle at Busaco (29 Sept.). But though he won a 
complete victory he had no idea of making a permanent stand, and 
hastened to re-occupy his position at Torres Vedras. Masséna now 
found himself confronted by the formidable lines of which neither he 
nor Napoleon had suspected the existence. The devastated country 
could furnish him with no supplies, and he was compelled to retreat 
after losing 30,000 men on his march. Meanwhile Soult had 
been ordered to leave Cadiz and reinforce Masséna. He succeeded 


614 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. xxtv. 


in capturing Badajoz, which commands the southern pass into 
Portugal; but finding that his colleague had already retreated he 
returned to the blockade of Cadiz. 

In March, 1811, the arrival of reinforcements from England enabled 
Wellington to take the offensive, and he drew up plans for a grand 
campaign in Spain. Before leaving Portugal, however, it was 
necessary to secure his communications by taking the great border 
fortresses. | Wellington himself undertook operations against 
Almeida and Ciudad Rodrigo in the north, while Beresford 
was entrusted with the siege of Badajoz on the southern road. 
Masséna had by this time rallied his forees and marched against 
Wellington, but was defeated at Fuentes d’Onoro (5 May), and as 
the result of the battle Almeida surrendered. But Soult had 
rapidly advanced to the relief of Badajoz, and compelled Beresford 
to fight a great battle at Albuera (16 May). After an obstinate 
aud costly struggle the English gained a victory, in spite of the 
errors committed by their commander; but the success was wholly 
without results. The siege of Badajoz was resumed; but before 
any real progress had been made Marmont, who superseded the 
disgraced Masséna,- effected a junction with Soult, and compelled 
the raising of the siege. Wellington could make no head against 
the overwhelming numbers of the combined French armies, and had 
to return to his defensive position in Portugal. But Ciudad Rodrigo 
and Badajoz remained in French hands, and Marmont went into 
winter quarters in the valley of the 'Tagus. 

Early in the next year Wellington resumed his enterprise, and 
captured Ciudad Rodrigo (19 Jan., 1812). Hurrying south- 
wards he stormed Badajoz (6 April), just in time to forestall the 
advance of Soult. Having thus secured his base of operations, he 
advanced against Marmont’s army, which he drove before him 
beyond Salamanca. Suddenly the French marshal turned, and by 
a rapid march placed himself between the English and their line of 
retreat to Portugal. Wellington had to return to Salamanca and 
give battle (22 July). Marmont was completely defeated, and so 
severely wounded that he had to resign the command to Clausel, 
who conducted the retreat. Wellington now marched upon 
Madrid, which he entered in triumph (12 August), and Joseph 
retired to Valencia, where he ordered Soult to join him. Thus all 
the French troops were concentrated in the east, and the English 
could not advance without having to face vastly superior numbers. 
An attack upon Burgos was foiled by Clausel, who had retreated 
to that town with Marmont’s army. Wellington. realised. that 
the time had not yet come for the conquest of Spain, and for the 
third time he evacuated the country to winter at Ciudad Rodriga, 


A.p. 1811-1812. RUSSIA AND PRUSSIA. 615 


Joseph returned once more to Madrid to enjoy a sovereignty which 
was doomed to speedy destruction. For in this year Napoleon had 
commenced his famous campaign against Russia, and the turning- 
point in his career had been reached. 


IV. THe War or LIBERATION. 


§ 41. The alliance between Russia and France, which had been 
formed at Tilsit and confirmed at Erfurt, was completely under- 
mined by Napoleon’s Austrian marriage, by the annexation of 
Oldenburg, and by Alexander’s desertion of the continental system. 
But the chief grievance to Russia was the apparent intention of 
Napoleon to do something for the Poles. The increase of the grand- 
duchy of Warsaw by the treaty of Vienna was so annoying to 
Alexander that he began to meditate on the possibility of restoring 
Poland himself, and making it a dependent kingdom for the Czar 
in the same way as Napoleon had treated Italy. He even went so 
far as to sound the Poles on the subject ; but he found that they 
had not forgotten the three partitions of their country, and that 
their sympathies were rather with France than with Russia. At 
the same time Napoleon was convinced that until Russia was sub- 
dued his empire was unsafe, and all hopes of avenging himself upon 
England were at anend. All through the year 1811 it was known 
that war was inevitable, but neither power was in a hurry to take 
the initiative. Meanwhile the various powers that retained nominal 
independence had to make up their minds as to the policy they 
would pursue. For no country was the decision harder than for 
Prussia. Neutrality was out of the question, as the Prussian 
territories, lying between the two combatants, must be occupied by 
one or the other. The friends and former colleagues of Stein were 
unanimous for a Russian alliance and a desperate struggle for 
liberty. But Hardenberg, who had become chancellor in 1810, 
was too prudent to embark in a contest which at the time was 
hopeless. The Czar had not been so consistent in his policy as to 
be avery desirable ally ; and, even with Russian assistance, it was 
certain that the Prussian frontiers could not be defended against 
the French, who had already garrisons in the chief fortresses, 
Hardenberg fully sympathised with the patriots, but he sacrificed 
enthusiasm to prudence, and offered the support of Prussia to 
France. ‘he treaty was arranged on the 24th of February, 1812. 
Frederick William gave the French a free passage through his 
territories, and undertook to furnish 20,000 men for service in the 
field, and as many more for garrison duty. In return for this 
Napoleon guaranteed the security of the Prussian kingdom as it 


616 MODERN EUROPE. Cuap. XxIv. 


stood, and held out the prospect of additions to it. It was an. 
unnatural and hollow alliance, and was understood to be so by the 
Czar. Scharnhorst, Gneisenau, and other friends of Stein resigned 
their posts, and many Prussian officers entered the service of the 
Czar. Austria, actuated by similar motives, adopted the same 
policy, but with less reluctance. After this example had been set 
by the two great powers, none of the lesser states of Germany dared 
to disobey the peremptory orders of Napoleon. But Turkey and 
Sweden, both of them old allies of France, were at this crisis in 
the opposition. The treaty of Tilsit had promised Moldavia and 
Wallachia to Alexander, and in 1809 the Czar had commenced a 
war for the conquest of these provinces. But the Turks made a 
more obstinate resistance than had been expected, and Napoleon 
now did all in his power to induce them to prolong the war. Alex- 
ander, however, was willing to moderate his demands as the contest 
with France approached, and the treaty of Bucharest established the 
Pruth as the boundary between Russia and Turkey (28 May, 1812). 
The Swedes were threatened with starvation by Napoleon’s stern 
command to close their ports not only against English, but against 
all German vessels. Bernadotte, who had just teen adopted as the 
heir of the childless Charles XIII., determined to throw in his lot 
with his new country, rather than with his old commander. He 
had also hopes of compensating Sweden for the loss of Finland by 
wresting Norway from the Danes, and this would never be agreed 
to by France. Accordingly Sweden prepared to support the cause 
of Alexander. 

§ 42. In May Napoleon had completed his preparations, and 
had collected an enormous force of about 400,000 men in eastern 
Germany. With the empress he appeared in Dresden, where the 
vassal princes, including on this occasion the rulers of Austria and 
Prussia, assembled to pay him homage. ‘To assure himself of the 
support of the Poles he sent De Pradt, archbishop of Mechlin, as 
ambassador to Warsaw. A diet was assembled, which formed itself 
into a General Confederation, and decreed the re-establishment of 
the Polish kingdom (26 June). To this act ‘the king of Saxony 
gave his approval; but Napoleon, afraid of irritating Austria, 
merely declared that the old limits of Poland could not be restored. 
In spite of this unsatisfactory answer, the Poles displayed the 
greatest enthusiasm for the French cause, and fought with all the 
national gallantry against the hated Russians. On the 23rd of June 
the French crossed the Niemen and commenced the invasion of 
Russian Poland. As long as they marched through Polish territory 
they found no special difficulty, as the population was well-disposed ; 
but when they reached Russia proper the difficulties of the task 


A.D. 1812. THE RUSSIAN EXPEDITION. 617 


became evident. The roads were bad and the transports broke 
down; the health of the soldiers suffered from the extreme heat 
and the failure of supplies; the peasants showed themselves 
fanatically hostile to the invaders. Napoleon’s plan was to fall 
upon the Russian troops as speedily as possible, and to inflict a 
crushing disaster. But he was delayed by numberless obstacles, 
and the delay was fatal. Barclay de Tolly, a Livonian, who com- 
manded the main Russian army of 140,000 men, fell back from his 
original position at Wilna to join the southern army of 50,000 men 
under Bagration. But the latter failed to follow his instructions, 
and the junction was only effected at Smolensk, 300 miles from the 
frontier. This retreat, the result of accident rather than of design, 
was as successful as the most masterly strategy could have been. 
The invaders had lost nearly 100,000 men before they reached 
Smolensk. The Russians were now eager for a battle; but Barclay, 
who saw how successful his previous movements had been, deter- 
mined to continue his retreat. He allowed the rear of his army to 
engage in an obstinate and indecisive contest; but in the mean- 
time he fired Smolensk, and the next day the Russians had 
disappeared from the field (18 August). Napoleon was aghast at 
tactics of which he had had no previous experiences, but he deter- 
mined to press on to Moscow, in the conviction that the loss of his 
capital would compel Alexander to treat. Meanwhile the Czar, 
listening to the complaints of the officers against a foreign com- 
mander, replaced Barclay by Kutusow, a native Russian, who was 
willing to gratify the general desire for a pitched battle. At 
Borodino the Russians waited for the French in a strong position, 
and a desperate struggle ensued (7 Sept.). The losses on both 
sides were enormous and nearly equal; and Napoleon, though the 
enemy retreated, had gained nothing but the power to march to 
Moscow. On the 14th of September he entered the Russian 
capital, and discovered to his horror that it had been deserted by 
all the native inhabitants. The next day a grand conflagration 
began, and, in spite of all the efforts of the French, three-quarters of 
the city were reduced to ruins. It was known afterwards that the 
governor, Count Rostopchin, had purposely had the fires kindled 
when the evacuation was determined upon. Even Napoleon was awed 
by such a reckless sacrifice of property; but he remained for five 
fatal weeks in Moscow, in the desperate hope that Alexander would 
give way. At last he had to resign hope, and on the 19th of October 
he gave the order for retreat. To avoid starvation he determined to 
take a more southerly route than that by which he had come. But 
Kutusow had foreseen this intention, and at Jaroslavetz the 
French were confronted with the Russian army (24 Oct.). A 
28 


618 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. xxiv. 


fierce contest ended in a French victory; but another such battle 
must result in annihilation, and Napoleon was compelled to take 
his old route, on which all supplies had been exhausted. From 
this moment the story of the retreat is one long catalogue of 
unimaginable horrors. The Russian winter set in with terrible 
severity, and thousands of the soldiers perished of cold. All 
discipline was given up, and the troops marched in a disorderly 
mass. Kutusow and his army, marching by a parallel road, cut off 
stragglers and constantly harassed the retreat. Ney, who com- 
manded the French rear-guard, spent his time in constant fighting 
to protect the march, and displayed an unconquerable heroism 
which earned for him the name of “ the bravest of the brave.” | If 
Kutusow had chosen, he could easily have annihilated the invaders 
and captured Napoleon, but he preferred to leave the task to the 
slower but surer agency of the climate. ‘The crisis of the retreat 
was the crossing of the Beresina (27 Nov.). The Russians 
cannonaded the bridge, and nothing but the brilliant courage of 
the French saved them from total destruction. Soon after this 
Napoleon, irritated by the news that his death had been reported 
in Paris and had led to disorders there, quitted the army and 
hurried to the capital. The command was entrusted to Murat; 
but the soldiers were bitterly irritated at their desertion by the 
emperor, and did not hesitate to compare it to his conduct in Egypt. 
At last, on the 13th of December, a small and shattered remnant 
of the magnificent army that had started six months before, crossed 
the Niemen into Prussian territory. At least 200,000 men had 
perished in the invasion, and nearly as many more were prisoners 
in the hands of the Russians. Murat, who had been king of 
Naples since Joseph’s elevation to the Spanish ‘throne, thought 
Napoleon’s cause ruined, and determined to make terms for him- 
self. He contrived to pass through Germany in disguise, and 
arrived safely in his dominions. The command now devolved 
upon Kugéne Beauharnais, who showed an honourable devotion to 
the man who had deserted his mother, and he succeeded in conduct- 
ing the remnant of the grand army into safe quarters at Leipzig. 

§ 43. The ruin of Napoleon’s army made a profound impression 
in Germany, and especially in Prussia, which had suffered more than 
any other country from French aggressions. Now or never was the 
moment for the patriotic party to realise the objects for which they 
had long been working. But the king and ministry hesitated. 
The French army was still on Prussian soil and in possession of 
Prussian fortresses. Deliverance could only be obtained with the 
help of Russia, and the Russians were allies whom it was easy to 
call in but difficult to get rid of. The treaty of Tilsit was not yet 


3 


Se ee ek ee in 


A.D. 1812—1813. TREATY OF KALISCH. 619 


forgotten, and Prussia might again have to pay the expenses of a 
reconciliation between France and Russia. On the other hand, if 
Prussia adhered to its alliance, the French would be saved from 
further disasters, the Russians would not advance beyond the 
Niemen, and Germany would remain as it stood. In such a case 
could not Prussia expect more from French gratitude than from 
Russian ambition? Moreover, it must not be forgotten that in 
Prussia, as in all the German states, there existed a strong French 
party, men who regarded the Empire as the legitimate successor of 
the Revolution, and who thought the abolition of feudal’ ideas and 
institutions a sufficient recompense for other sacrifices. The decision 
was one of vast importance both for Germany and for Europe, and 
fortunately it was not left to Frederick William III. General York, 
the commander of the Prussian contingent in French service, took 
upon’ himself to conclude the Convention of Tauroggen (30 Dec., 
1812), by which his troops deserted the power they had been sent 
to assist and undertook to remain neutral. The king was aghast 
at the compromising act of his general, tried by all means to excuse 
himself to Napoleon, and went so far as to annul the Convention 
and to dismiss York. But public opinion was strongly in favour 
of the Russian alliance, and the king was soon induced to alter 
his mind. For a moment it was doubtful whether the Russians 
would cross the Niemen and undertake the task of freeing Ger- 
many. ‘The old Russian party, with Kutusow at its head, was 
strongly in favour of standing on the defensive and leaving the 
foreigners to settle their own affairs. Alexander’s hesitation was 
removed by the influence of Stein, who eagerly seized the opportu- 
nity for which he had long waited. Stein was appointed to ad- 
minister Hast. Prussia as the Czar’s official, and in that capacity, 
which aroused the suspicion of many of his former colleagues, he did 
not hesitate to summon a diet at Kénigsberg (5 Feb., 1813), which 
decreed a levy in arms of the whole population for a war with 
France. hg 

Frederick William II]. found that his hand had been forced and 
that his only hope lay in obedience to the popular will. At the 
end of January he fled from Berlin to Breslau, and a month after- 
wards he concluded the treaty of Kalisch with the Czar (28 Feb.). 
Russia agreed to furnish 150,000 men, and Prussia was to supply at 
least 80,000. The latter kingdom was to be restored to its old dimen- 
sions before 1806 ; but Alexander was careful not to pledge himself to 
the former frontiers. The understanding was that Prussia should 
give up some of the Polish annexations and should be compensated 
with German territory. Vigorous measures were now taken to arm 
Prussia for the great struggle, and Scharnhorst was at last enabled 


620 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. XXIv. 


to complete his military reforms. War was formally declared 
against France on the 16th of March, and on the next day the king 
departed from all the traditions of Prussian rule by publishing a 
touching appeal to his subjects. It was answered by an over~ 
whelming burst of enthusiasm; classes vied with each other in 
making sacrifices for the public welfare, and in an incredibly short 
space of time the new military organisation was set on foot. A 
patriotic literature was ealled into being, which can boast the 
names of Kérner, Riickert, and Amdt. Already Eugéne Beau- 
harnais had led his army from Prussian soil, and Berlin had been 
entered in triumph by the Russian commander Wittgenstein with 
York at his side (11 March). 

§ 44. Meanwhile Napoleon, on his arrival in Paris, had speedily 
restored order and set to work to repair the terrible losses he had 
suffered. Ashis dynasty seemed to depend only upon his own life, 
he drew up rules for the administration of the country in case of his 
death. The Empress Maria Louisa was to be regent for his infant 
son, the King of Rome, who had been born in 1811. Cambacéres, 
his former colleague in the consulship, was to be First Councillor of 
the Regency, and Champagny was to be chief Secretary. Further 
to secure his power he determined to bring his long quarrel with 
the church to a close. Pius VII. was brought from Savona to Fon- 
tainebleau, and there induced to. sign a new concordat (25 Jan., 
1813). In this he gave way on most of the points in dispute, 
authorised the metropolitan to confirm the bishops whom Napoleon 
had appointed, and practically abdicated his temporal sovereignty 
by agreeing to take up his residence at Avignon and to receive 
the proffered income of two million francs. But Napoleon’s chief 
interest was the formationof a newarmy. The regular conscription 
of 1818 was collected, and that of 1814 anticipated, the national 
guard had to furnish 100,000 men, and recruits were collected in 
every possible way. ‘To the astonishment of Europe the French 
army was numerically as formidable as ever. ‘The new levies were 
doubtless raw and untrained, but there were sufficient veterans 
left to set them an example, and Napoleon and his marshals were 
unsurpassed in the art of inspiring their troops with courage and 
inuring them to hardship. But the new army had two fatal defects, 
it was almost without either artillery or cavalry, and these were 
the two arms on which Napoleon had been accustomed to rely. 

§ 45. The allies commenced the “ war of liberation” by issuing 
from Kalisch an appeal to all Germans to rise in defence of their 
liberty (25 March). But it met with a very scanty response. The 
princes of the Confederation of the Rhine were not yet prepared 
to break their bonds, or to accept any liberty that was not forced 


A.D. 1813. THE WAR OF LIBERATION. 621 


upon them. The most powerful of them, Frederick Augustus of 
Saxony, was so incapable of deciding between his personal wishes 
and his obligations to Napoleon that he escaped responsibility by 
flying to Prague, and he had no general to play the part of York. 
The allies were compelled to resort to arms to compel the adhesion 
of the states in whose behalf they were fighting. The only power 
that hastened to join the coalition was Sweden. Bernadotte, who 
practically ruled the country in the name of Charles XIII., was 
determined to effect the annexation of Norway, and in April he 
signed a treaty with Prussia, by which Sweden on this condition 
promised help against France. One result of this treaty was that 
Denmark adhered more closely than ever to Napoleon, who promised 
to guarantee the integrity of her dominions. 

The supreme command of the allied forces was entrusted to 
Kutusow, and under him the chief authority was exercised by 
Wittgenstein and the Prussian cavalry-leader Bliicher. The main 
efforts of the allies were directed towards Saxony. At Méckern 
Wittgenstein defeated prince Eugéne (5 April), and forced him to 
retire to Magdeburg. By the end of the month Kutusow and 
Bliicher arrived, and the combined Russian and Prussian armies 
occupied Dresden (24 April). Even this blow failed to induce the 
king of Saxony to declare himself, and by this time Napoleon had 
arrived with his new army, in which he had absorbed Eugéne’s 
troops. At Gross Gérschen, near the scene of Gustavus Adolphus’ 
great battle of Liitzen, the first great contest was fought (2 May). 
The French were superior in numbers, and Napoleon’s strategy gave 
him the victory. But the allies were neither crushed or dispersed, 
and might have resumed the battle if the Russians had not pre- 
ferred to retreat behind the Elbe and to wait for reinforcements. 
Want of cavalry prevented the French from pursuing the enemy, 
and the march was conducted in perfect order and without loss. 
The unfortunate Frederick Augustus was compelled, on pain of 
deposition, to place his army at the disposal of the emperor and 
to announce his continued adhesion to the Confederation of the 
Rhine. Determined to follow up his first success, Napoleon now 
hastened to cross the Elbe and attacked the allies in the position 
they had assumed at Bautzen (20, 21 May). Again the Russians 
and Prussians displayed conspicuous courage, but again superior 
numbers and strategy gave the French the victory. Wittgenstein 
was now superseded by Barclay de Tolly, and the allies retreated 
into Silesia. A vigorous advance of the French might have 
terminated the campaign, but to everybody’s surprise Napoleon 
opened negotiations and concluded an armistice for two months at 
Poischwitz (4 June), 


622 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. XXxtIy. 


§ 46. This armistice was afterwards recognised by Napoleon as 
one of the gravest errors he had ever committed. His motive is to 
be found in the threatening attitude of Austria, which had long been 
entreated to join the coalition. Metternich had: no real sympathy 
with the leaders of the war of liberation. He regarded their dreams 
of a united Germany and the projected reforms of Stein as revo- 
lutionary and jacobinical. At the same time he was naturally 
anxious to recover for Austria what had been lost in the treaties of 
Pressburg and Vienna. His diplomacy was marvellously acute and 
well-timed, and circumstances played into his hands. He held back 
from the coalition until the Austrian alliance had become im- 
peratively necessary, and he could dictate his own terms. On the 
27th of June he concluded the treaty of Reichenbach, by which 
undertook the congenial office of mediator, and promised that 
Austria would join the allies in case Napoleon rejected certain 
specified terms that were to be offered to him. ‘These terms were 
wholly different from what had been anticipated in the alliance of 
he Kalisch, and were primarily conceived in the interests of Austria. 
France was to cede the Illyrian Provinces to Austria, to dissolve the 
grand-duchy of Warsaw, to evacuate all the provinces which had 
been taken from Austria and Prussia, and to restore the district in 
north Germany which had been annexed in 1810. Napoleon was 
determined from the first to make no concessions, but, after a stormy 
interview with Metternich, he accepted the proposal of a congress at 
Prague. The congress was nothing more than a sham. Prussia 
used every effort to avert the possibility of the Austrian proposals 
being accepted, and Napoleon thought only of bringing his Italian 
army into Carniola so as to intimidate the Austrian government 
into remaining neutral. ‘This scheme was based on a complete mis- 
conception, and on the 12th of August Austria declared war against 
France. From this moment the ultimate success of the coalition 
was almost assured, but at the same time it forfeited all hopes of 
carrying out its original programme. 

§ 47. The interval of peace had been employed by both sides in 
military preparations, but in these the allies, being less exhausted, 
had a great advantage. ‘They were able to put three considerable 
armies in the field and to plan a campaign on the grand scale. In 
Bohemia the chief army, 250,000. strong, was commanded by the 
Austrian Prince Schwarzenberg. Bliicher was at the head of 
100,000 Russians and Prussians, while the northern army in Bran- 
denburg, consisting of the Swedish contingent and 50,000 troops 
of the allies, was led by Bernadotte, the crown-prince of Sweden. 
Great things were expected of the ex-marshal of France, but Ber- 
nadotte was not very eager to fight against his own countrymen, 


AD. 1813. THE WAR OF LIBERATION. 623 


and his chief anxiety was to preserve his Swedish soldiers for a war 
with Denmark. Itngland had concluded subsidy treaties with all 
the allied powers, and had stipulated for the restoration and increase 
of Hanover. ‘The plan concerted by the allies was that the three 
armies should all converge upon Dresden, avoid separate encoun- 
ters as much as possible, and only strike a great blow when their 
junction had made them irresistible. 

Napoleon had very inferior numbers at his disposal, but he 
determined to surprise the enemy by a succession of rapid attacks. 
Oudinot was despatched against Berlin, but he was met and defeated 
at Gross Beeren by a portion of Bernadotte’s army under Bilow 
(23 Aug.). Napoleon himself started to attack Bliicher in Silesia 
but his departure encouraged the Bohemian army to advance upon 
Dresden, and this news compelled him to entrust the command to 
Macdonald, and to return by forced marches to the defence of his 
head-quarters. Bliicher now fell upon Macdonald and completely 
crushed him at Katzbach (26 Aug.). Meanwhile Napoleon arrived 
in time to save Dresden, and in a great battle under the walls the 
French were victorious (27 Aug.). Among the slain was Moreau, 
the hero of Hohenlinden, who had been recalled from his exile in 
America on the advice of Bernadotte as a possible rival to Napoleon 
in the favour of the French soldiers. The battle of Dresden was a 
great blow to the allies, but Napoleon was not strong enough to 
complete their defeat by an energetic pursuit. Vandamme, who 
had been sent with 40,000 men to attack the Bohemian army in 
the rear, was surrounded by superior numbers at Kulm, and after 
an obstinate conflict was compelled to capitulate with all his 
soldiers (80 Aug.). To complete the French disasters Ney, who 
had attempted to renew Oudinot’s attack upon Berlin, was utterly 
routed by Biilow at Dennewitz (6 Sept.). 

Napoleon’s scheme of crushing the allies in detachments had failed. 
There was now nothing to prevent the junction of the allied forces, 
and from this moment the freedom of Germany was assured. The 
only question now left was what organisation should be given to the 
German states. At Kalisch the idea had been that all the princes 
of the Confederation should be expelled from their thrones, and if 
they were restored it should only be on conditions which should 
establish the unity of Germany. A. central commission, with Stein 
as president, had actually been appointed to administer the territories 
which should be thus confiscated. But the adhesion of Austria to 
the coalition had foiled these schemes, and Metternich’s conservative 
policy was enabled to prevail. By the treaty of Toplitz (Sept. 9, 
1813), which confirmed the alliance between Russia, Prussia, and 
Austria, it was decided that all members of the Rhenish Confedera- 


624 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. xxIv. 


tion should retain their power and should merely resume their 
independent existence. The first state to take advantage of these 
advantageous terms was Bavaria, which had been the constant ally 
of Napoleon since 1805. By the treaty of Reid, Maximilian Joseph 
placed his army at the disposal of the allies and agreed to surrender 
Tyrol, but stipulated that he should receive ample compensation. 

The allies were in no hurry to complete the work they had so 
auspiciously begun, and it was only Bliicher’s energy that at last 
induced them to advance. ‘The news that the Silesian army had 
crossed the Elbe drew Napoleon from Dresden, but he was foiled 
in his attempt to force Bliicher into a battle, and had to retire to 
Leipzig. Here he determined to make a stand against the enormous 
forces that were closing round him. After a number of minor but 
important engagements had been decided on the 16th October, 
the great “battle of the nations” was fought on the 18th. The 
French held their own throughout the day, but their losses were 
so great that they had to retreat in the evening, and they could 
not halt: until they had crossed the Rhine. In Leipzig was found 
the unlucky king of Saxony, who was sent as a prisoner to Berlin. 
The French power in Germany, lately so irresistible, was now 
represented only by the garrisons which occupied the chief fortresses 
from’ east to west. Many of these, including Dresden, Danzig, 
Ciistrin, Stettin, and Torgau, were compelled to surrender in the 
next few months; but several, such as Magdeburg, Hamburg, and 
Mainz, held out till the conclusion of peace. ‘The Confederation of 
the Rhine ceased to exist, and most of its unpatriotic members 
hastened to purchase the continuance of their rule by accepting the 
treaty of Téplitz. The only territories which fell to the adminis- 
tration of Stein’s central commission were the kingdom of Saxony 
and the little duchy of Berg, which Napoleon had conferred on his 
infant nephew Louis after Murat’s accession in Naples. Oiden- 
burg and. Brunswick were occupied by their former rulers. The 
kingdom of Westphalia disappeared on the flight of Jerome, and 
the elector of Hesse returned to Cassel. Outside Germany the 
effects of Napoleon’s fall were equally felt. Holland was freed by 
General Biilow, and the son of the former Stadholder was restored as 
Sovereign Prince of the Netherlands with the title of William I. 
Denmark was compelled to accept the treaty of Kiel (Jan. 14, 
1814), by which the French alliance was abandoned, Norway was 
ceded to Sweden, and Heligoland to England. As compensation 
Frederick VI. was to receive Swedish Pomerania and Riigen. Thus 
Bernadotte received the reward of his adroit but not very generous 
conduct, and Sweden, losing the last of the acquisitions of Gustavus 
Adolphus, ceased to have any connection with Germany. 


A.D. 1813. THE ALLIES IN FRANCE. 625 


§ 48. To complete the list of Napoleon’s disasters, this same 
year, 18138, witnessed the overthrow of his power in Spain. Soult 
with a large number of the best troops had been summoned to take 
part in the German war, and for the first time Wellington had to 
contend with fairly equal forces. In the spring he advanced from 
Ciudad Rodrigo, and the French retreated before him to Vittoria, 
a town on the high road to France. There Jourdan, who now 
commanded in Soult’s place, was utterly defeated, and the Pen- 
insular war was at last decided. Joseph retired froma kingdom 
which he had never been capable of ruling, and France itself was 
now exposed to attack. The task of defending the frontier was en- 
trusted to Soult, who discharged it with skill and devotion. Step 
by step, however, Wellington fought his way through the Pyrenees, 
and in January he was able to reduce Bayonne. 

§ 49. Even after the great successes of Leipzig and Vittoria the 
allies seem to have doubted their ability to depose Napoleon, and 
only the very boldest spirits ventured to propose such an enter- 
prise. Invasions of France had rarely been successful in the past, 
and if Napoleon had enjoyed the real affection of his subjects, the 
march upon Paris would have been as impossible for Schwarzenberg 
as it had been for Charles V. or Marlborough. From their camp at 
Frankfort the allied sovereigns offered the usurper terms that after 
- subsequent events appear impossible. Not only might he keep his 
crown, but France was to retain the left bank of the Rhine and 
enjoy its ‘natural frontier.” This proposal, so disgraceful to the 
champions of Germany, was undoubtedly due to the preponderating 
influence of Austria, but fortunately Napoleon was still too confi- 
dent to accept it. On his return to Paris he had roughly sup- 
pressed all tokens of the prevailing discontent and had occupied 
himself with wringing more conscripts from the exhausted people. 
As some of his acquisitions must needs be surrendered, he made a 
virtue of necessity by dismissing his two prisoners, Pius VII. and 
Ferdinand of Spain. He felt certain that the allies would not 
enter France until the spring, and that by that time he would be 
ready to receive them. But his expectations were not realised. 
Stein arrived in Frankfort and recovered his influence over Alex- 
ander J, By the end of November it was decided to withdraw the 
proposals of peace and to cross the Rhine. But the Austrians 
were only half-hearted in the matter, and it was not till January 
that the two armies of Schwarzenberg and Bliicher arrived on 
French soil. ‘This winter campaign rendered it impossible for 
Napoleon to defend the frontier, and he concentrated what forces he 
could collect in Champagne. Never did he display more desperate 
courage or more brilliant strategy. Again and again he contrived 

28% 


626 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. XXIV. 


to separate the hostile forces and to inflict considerable defeats 
upon them, but want of troops rendered him unable to follow up 
his successes. ‘I'o some extent these small victories were disad- 
vantageous to him, for they prevented him from accepting the very 
favourable terms which were offered to him by a congress which 
met in February at Chatillon. He might have kept the French 
crown with the boundaries of 1792, but he persisted in demanding 
not only the Rhine frontier, but also the Italian kingdom for Eugéne 
Beauharnais and establishments for his brothers Joseph and Jerome. 
These demands were so extravagant that the congress was dis- 
solved, and the allies, who had renewed. the coalition by the 
treaty of Chaumont (1 March), determined to bring the war to a 
close by advancing upon Paris. Bernadotte had now brought his 
army to join the other two, and Napoleon could not venture to 
meet such tremendous forces in the field. As a last resource he 
tried to divert the attention of the allies by marching round to 
their rear and attacking their communications. But no attention 
was paid to his movements, and the invaders marched steadily 
upon the capital. Maria Louisa and her son had gone to Blois, and 
the defence was entrusted to Joseph Bonaparte, who was now 
commander of the national guard, and Marmont. On the 30th 
of March, Bliicher stormed the heights of Montmartre, and on the 
next day Marmont capitulated. The allied sovereigns made a 
solemn entry into Paris, and were welcomed with acclamations by a 
mob which had learned by experience to side with the strongest. 

Napoleon was at l’ontainebleau when he heard of this crowning 
- misfortune which made further resistance hopeless. His marshals 
called upon him to abdicate, and he was obliged to send a letter to 
the allies in which he offered to resign his crown to his son. But 
the offer was refused, and on the 11th of April the terms of the 
bargain were finally settled. Napoleon abdicated unconditionally, 
and was allowed to rule as sovereign in the island of Elba, to retain 
the title of emperor. and to receive an income of two million francs. 
Just at this moment the last struggle upon French soil was being 
fought. After crossing the Pyrenees Wellington had pursued Soult 
from point to point, and finally defeated him at Toulouse (10 April). 
On the 4th of May Napoleon landed from an English frigate at 
Elba. His first wife, Josephine, did not long survive his downfall, 
as she died on the 29th of May. Eugéne Beauharnais had to 
resign his hopes of the Italian kingdom and to content himself with 
the principality of Kichst&adt in Bavaria, 

§ 50. The occupation of Paris had placed France at the disposal 
of the allies, but as yet they had determined on nothing but the 
deposition of Napoleon. The infant king of Rome had the advan- 


A.D. 1814. TREATY OF PARIS. 627 


tage of being the grandson of the Emperor of Austria, and the Czar 
was determined not to impose any ruler upon the French people 
against their will. If there had been any real enthusiasm for the 
Napoleonic dynasty it would have been allowed to continue. But 
the French had witnessed too many constitutional changes to have 
any prejudices as to the manner of their rule, and witnessed a 
foreign occupation as complacently as the establishment of the 
Directory or the Consulate. The only party which had any vigour 
at all was the royalists, and it was soon agreed that the Bourbons 
should be restored. The management of affairs during the interim 
was undertaken by the skilful hands of Talleyrand, who had always 
been a royalist at heart. At his dictation the Senate appointed a 
provisional government and drew up a constitution. Soon after- 
wards the count of Artois arrived in Paris with the title of 
Lieutenant of the kingdom. He concluded a military convention 
with the allies, by which the French garrisons were to evacuate the 
fifty-three fortresses which they still held in foreign countries 
(23 April). On the 29th of April the count of Provence, now 
Louis XVIII., who had been living during his exile at Hartwell in 
Buckinghamshire, made a formal entry into the city which he had 
quitted in 1792. He had enjoyed the reputation of a cultivated 
and moderate man in contrast with his hot-headed younger brother, 
but he was really imbued with all the old traditions of his family. 
He refused to accept the constitution which the Senate had drawn 
up, and insisted on the restoration of the absolute monarchy. It 
was only the firmness of Alexander I. that compelled him to make 
concessions, but he was determined that the liberty of his subjects 
should be regarded as a voluntary grant from the crown and not 
as a compact. On the 30th of May he concluded the treaty of 
Paris with the allied sovereigns. France was allowed to retain 
the frontiers of 1792, so that the annexation of Avignon and the 
Venaissin was confirmed, and to them was added several districts of 
Germany and Savoy, amounting to about a hundred square miles, 
and containing more than a million inhabitants. Almost all the 
colonies which England had seized were restored, except Mauritius, 
Tobago, and St. Lucia, and most of the stolen works of art were 
allowed to remain. No indemnity was demanded, and the allies 
undertook to evacuate French territory at once. Few conquered 
countries have ever been treated so leniently, especially when one 
considers the provocation that had been given. Holland was 
restored to the House of Orange, and it was arranged that iis 
territory should be increased. The navigation of the Rhine was 
declared to be free. Most of the Dutch colonies were given back, 
but England retained the Cape of Good Hope, Demerara, and 


628 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. XxIVv. 


Essequibo. Switzerland was to be independent. The German 
states were to continue subject to the ruling sovereigns, but were 
to be united into a federation. Italy, with -the exception of the 
portion to be restored to Austria, was to consist of independent 
states. All questions still unsettled were to be referred to a general 
Congress which was summoned to meet at Vienna within two 
months. At the instance of England a clause was inserted pro- 
viding that the powers should make joint efforts for the suppression 
of the slave-trade. Private agreements between the allies settled 
that the addition to Holland should consist of Belgium; that 
Austria should receive in Italy the Venetian provinces and 
Lombardy as far as the Ticino; that Genoa should be given to the 
king of Sardinia; and that the four militant powers should reserve 
to themselves all questions about the redistribution of Germany, 
Italy, and Poland. 

On the 2nd of June Louis XVIII. published the Charter of the 
French constitution, a draft of which had been submitted to the 
allies before the conclusion of the treaty. ‘Two legislative chambers 
were to be appointed, the one of peers nominated by the crown, the 
other of deputies chosen by the people. A deputy must be over 
forty years old and pay a thousand francs in direct taxes ; an elector 
must be over thirty and pay three hundred francs. The chamber 
of deputies had the right of granting taxes and supervising expen- 
diture. The king reserved to himself the right of initiating laws ; 
ministers were to be responsible; the peers were to be free; and all 
citizens were declared eligible to office. The old nobles recovered 
their titles, and the new nobles were confirmed in their rank. The 
Roman Catholic religion was ceclared to be that of the state, but 
all other beliefs were to be tolerated. The Charter was signed by 
Louis XVIII. as given “in the 19th year of his reign.” 


V. Tue ConGRESS OF VIENNA AND THE HunpRED Days. 


§ 51. The Congress of Vienna was the greatest European as- 
sembly that had met since the Council of Constance. Every 
country except Turkey was represented. Besides the rulers of 
Russia, Austria, and Prussia, the kings of Bavaria, Wurtemberg, 
and Denmark, with a number of lesser German princes, were 
present in person. But the most important members were the 
ministers of the great states: Metternich for Austria; Hardenberg 
for Prussia; Castlereagh, and afterwards Wellington, for England ; 
Nesselrode for Russia; and Talleyrand for France. <A secret article 
of the Peace of Paris had reserved the most burning questions for 
the separate decision of Austria, Russia, Prussia, and England, 


A.D. 1814. CONGRESS OF VIENNA. 629 


But this arrangement was overthrown by the audacious and 
masterly intrigues of Talleyrand, who, at first barely tolerated, 
gradually managed to share with Metternich the chief influence in 
the deliberations. ‘he first few weeks were spent in festivities, 
and it was not till the 1st of November that business was com- 
menced, Even then the formal sittings of the Congress were of 
slight importance, as the real decisions were arrived at’ in private 
colloquies between the chief ambassadors. The Congress marks 
the formal triumph of the reaction against the principles of the 
Revolution, but its proceedings were characterised by a disregard of 
popular rights, of differences of race and religion, and of historical 
tradition, worthy of Napoleon in his most absolute days. Europe 
was treated as if it were a blank map which might be divided 
smply into arbitrary districts of so many square miles and so 
many inhabitants. 

The most critical questions that required settlement were con- 
nected with the fate of Saxony and Poland. AJexander J. had set 
his heart on obtaining the grand-duchy of Warsaw, and Prussia 
demanded as compensation for its loss in the east the whole of 
Saxony. But Austria was firmly opposed to such an aggrandise- 
ment of its old rival, and was supported on this point by Eng- 
land and France. Bavaria and most of the lesser German states 
were actuated by bitter jealousy against Prussia. Hardenberg lost 
ground by foolishly supporting Austria in opposition to Russia in 
the Polish question, and trusting to the gratitude of Metternich. 
So high did feeling run that at one time there seemed a prospect of 
a new European war, and a formal alliance was concluded between 
Austria, England, and France. Ultimately, however, the matter 
was peacefully settled. Saxony was divided into two parts, the one 
including Dresden and Leipzig was restored to Frederick Augustus, 
the other was ceded to Prussia. As further compensation Prussia 
obtained Posen with the town of Thorn in the east, and in the west 
all that had been lost by the treaty of Tilsit, the duchies of Jiilich 
and Berg, the old electoral territories of Cologne and Trier with the 
city of Aachen, and parts of Luxemburg and Limburg. Russia 
received the whole of the grand-duchy of Warsaw except Posen and 
Thorn, and Alexander fulfilled his promises to the Poles by granting 
them a liberal constitution. 

It is impossible to do more than summarise the other decisions of 
the Congress. Swedish Pomerania had been ceded by the treaty of 
Kiel to Denmark, but had long been coveted by Prussia. ‘The 
Danish claims were bought off with two million thalers and the duchy 
of Lauenburg, but Hanover had to be compensated for the latter by 
the cession of the devotedly loyal province of East Friesland, one of 


630 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. XXIV. 


the acquisitions of Frederick the Great. Hanover, which now assumed 
the rank of a kingdom without opposition, was also aggrandised by 
the acquisition of Hildesheim, Goslar, and other small districts. 
Austria was naturally one of the great gainers by the Congress. 
Eastern Galicia was restored by Russia, and the Tyrol, Salzburg, 
and the Inn district by Bavaria. As compensation for the Nether- 
lands, Venetia and Lombardy became Austrian provinces. Bavaria, 
in return for its losses in the east, received Wiirzburg, Aschaffen- 
burg, and its former possessions in the Palatinate. Long discussions 
took place about the constitution to be given to Germany, and here 
the hopes of the national party were doomed to bitter disappoint- 
ment. Metternich would hear nothing of the proposed revival of the 
medizval Empire,and Prussia was not yet strong enough to assume 
an imperial position in opposition to Austria, Finally a Confede- 
ration was formed which secured the semblance of unity, but gave 
almost complete independence to the separate states. ‘lhe members 
numbered thirty-eight, and included the four remaining free cities, 
Frankfort, Hamburg, Liibeck, and Bremen, and the kings of 
Denmark and the Netherlands. The diet was to meet at Frankfort 
under the presidency of Austria, but in matters concerning religion 
or the rights of members the decision of a majority was not to be 
binding. The Confederation was as weak and disunited as the old 
Empire and had none of its traditions or prestige. 

In Italy the same process of restoration and subdivision was car- 
ried out. Victor Emmanuel I. recovered his kingdom of Sardinia, 
with the addition of Genoa as compensation for the portion of Savoy 
which France retained. Modena was given to a Hapsburg prince, 
Francis 1V., son ef the archduke Ferdinand, and Beatrice the 
heiress of the house of Este. Tuscany was restored to Ferdinand IIL., 
a brother of the Austrian Emperor. Charles Louis, son of the 
Bourbon king of Etruria, was compensated with Lucca and a 
promise of the succession in the duchy of Parma, which was for the 
time given to Napoleon’s wife, Maria Louisa. Pius VII. had already 
returned to Rome, and the Papal states now recovered their oid 
extent. But Pius refused at first to accept these terms because he 
was deprived of Avignon and the Venaissin, and because Austrian 
garrisons were in occupation of Ferrara and Comacchio. Naples 
was left for a time in the hands of Joachim Murat, as a reward for 
his desertion of Napoleon after the battle of Leipzig. Switzerland 
was declared independent and neutral, but its federal unity was 
loosened by a new constitution (Aug., 1815). The number of 
cantons were raised to twenty-two by the addition of Geneva, Wallis 
(Valais), and Neufchatel, the last under Prussian suzerainty. ‘The 
position of capital was to be enjoyed in rotation by Berne, Zurich, 


A.D; 1815. THE HUNDRED DAYS. 631 


and Lucerne. The kingdom of the Netherlands was formed for the 
house of Orange by the union of Holland and Belgium and the 
addition of Luxemburg, which made the king a member of the 
German Confederation. The professed object of this artificial union 
of Catholics and Protestants was the erection of a strong bulwark 
against French aggressions. 

§ 52. The deliberations at Vienna had been hurried on by the 
news that Napoleon had suddenly quitted Elba and had landed at 
Cannes (1 March, 1815). ‘The allies had already recognised the 
folly of placing an adventurous and reckless man midway between 
two kingdoms, both of which had once belonged to him and which 
were still unsettled. In France the Bourbons failed to make them- 
selves popular, and it was difficult for Frenchmen not to contrast 
the humiliation of receiving a dynasty at foreign dictation with the 
recent glories of the empire. The prevalent discontent, of which 
intelligence was despatched to Elba, coupled with the news of dis- 
putes among the allies, encouraged Napoleon to make a. last effort 
to regain his power. Jor the moment everything seemed to favour 
him. ‘The audacity and suddenness of his movement dazzled and 
attracted the people. In his proclamations he undertook to give 
up all thought of aggression and to grant a liberal constitution. All 
the towns hastened to open their gates to him. His old comrades, 
Soult, Masséna, and Augereau, espoused his cause, and even Ney, 
who had completely gone over to the Bourbons, was gained by a few 
words from his old commander. Louis XVIII. was speedily con- 
vinced that resistance was impossible and fled to Ghent. On the 
30th of March Napoleon entered the Tuileries, and at once 
appointed a ministry which included Fouché, Carnot, Maret, Cam- 
bacéres, etc. Ina formal announcement of his return to the allies 
he offered to accept the treaty of Paris. 

§ 53. The news of Napoleon’s success decided the action of Murat, 
who was discontented with his treatment by the allies. He had 
made terms with Austria at the beginning of 1814, in the hope of 
obtaining all Italy south of the Po as a kingdom for himself. That 
hope had been destroyed by the restoration of Pius VII. and of . 
the rulers of Tuscany and Modena, and he felt that Naples would 
not long be left to him. By secret negotiations he had reconciled 
himself with Napoleon at Elba, and he now determined openly to 
espouse the cause of his brother-in-law. He issued a manilesto 
calling upon the Italians to rise on behalf of their freedom and 
unity, and led his Neapolitan troops into the Papal States. Austria 
gladly welcomed the breach of a treaty which had become a serious 
obstacle to her policy. Murat’s early successes were speedily 
reversed when the Austrian armies had time to unite. He was 


632 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. XXIV. 


defeated in a two days’ battle at Tolentino (May 2, 3), and, return- 
ing to Naples, he embarked with a few of his immediate followers for 
the south of France. Two days later the Austrian troops entered 
Naples and restored Ferdinand IV., who now assumed the title of 
“ Ferdinand I. of the Two Sicilies.” 

§ 54. Meanwhile the allies had refused to listen to Napoleon’s 
proposals and had declared him the public enemy of Europe. 
Steps were at once taken to prepare for war, and the English and 
Prussian armies were assembled in Belgium under Wellington and 
Bliicher respectively. Napoleon on his side was eager to strike the 
first blow and if possible to divide the two armies so as to defeat 
them separately. He succeeded in thrusting himself between the 
English and Prussians, but they were so near together that he had 
to fight a double battle on the 16th of June. At Ligny the 
Prussians, after an obstinate struggle, were compelled to retreat, 
But at Quatre Bras Wellington’s mixed army of English, Belgians, 
and Hanoverians, made a successful resistance to the attacks of 
Ney. Still, on the whole, the French had a distinct advantage, and 
a rapid and energetic movement might have given them a great 
victory. But Napoleon scemed to have lost some of his old vigour 
and resolution. The 17th of June was wasted on a review, and he 
miscalculated both the losses of the Prussians and their line of 
retreat. Thinking that they were utterly routed, he detached 30,000 
men under Grouchy to pursue them in the direction of Liége. But 
Bliicher, with Gneisenau to help him, had already rallied his troops 
and retired northwards to Wavre, whence it was possible for him to 
advance to Wellington’s assistance. On the 18th of June the great 
battle of Waterloo, or of La Belle Alliance, as the Prussians prefer 
to call it, was fought. ‘Through the whole day the obstinate courage 
of the English held their position against the desperate assaults 
of the French. At last the battle was decided by the arrival of the 
Prussians, which had been wholly unforeseen by Napoleon. His 
line had to be weakened to oppose them, and the English were thus 
enabled to assume the aggressive. By the combined exertions of 
the allies the French army was driven from the field, and the Prus- 
sian pursuit completed the rout. Napoleon had fled when he saw 
that all was hopeless, and on the evening of the 20th of June he 
returned to Paris. The steady advance of the allies and the obvious 
disinclination of the citizens to suffer in his personal cause proved 
to Napoleon that he could not struggle with destiny. For the 
second time he abdicated in favour of his son, appointed a commis- 
sion to govern France, and endeavoured to «scape from Rochfort to 
America. But the port was blockaded by the English fleet, and he 
embarked on the Bellerophon, throwing himself upon the generosity 


A.D. 1815. SECOND TREATY OF PARIS. 633 


of a country that had never refused to shelter the unfortunate. 
But with the allies policy prevailed over sentiment, and on his arri- 
val at Plymouth Napoleon learned that he had been condemned 
to imprisonment in the island of St. Helena. There he lived, sur- 
rounded by a few faithful followers, fur six gloomy years, until his 
death on the 5th of May, 1821. 

§ 55. Murat’s fate was soon decided. Napoleon had disapproved 
of his rash movement, and had forbidden him to quit the south of 
France. On the news of Waterloo he determined to return to his 
former kingdom and to raise an insurrection against the Bourbon 
king. In October he landed on the coast of Calabria, but the popu- 
lation refused to rise on his behalf. Before he could effect his escape 
he was captured, tried and condemned by a military commission, 
and shot (15 Oct., 1815). His rapid rise from an ignoble origin 
and his tragic fate have given Murat a reputation in history which 
he hardly deserves. 

§ 56. Long before this Wellington and Bliicher had appeared 
before Paris, and, a{ter an attempted resistance on the part of Davoust, 
the city capitulated on the 3rd of July. The Prussian general was 
eager to despoil the French, and expyessed in a letter to his king the 
hope “that the diplomatists would not be allowed a second time to 
lose what the soldiers had won with their blood.” Wellington had 
had great difficulty in preventing his colleague from blowing up the 
bridge of Jena over the Seine. Again the allies had France at their 
disposal. But practically the matter had been settled by the in- 
trigues of Fouché, who was president of the provisional government. 
He convinced Louis XVIII. that moderation was necessary in his 
own interests, he gained over Wellington, always attached to the 
cause of legitimacy, and he contrived to secure the tranquillity of 
Paris. On the 8th of July Louis X VIII. returned, and the allied sove- 
reigns, when they hurricd to Paris to settle affairs, were surprised 
to find that one part of the problem was already solved. Talleyrand 
and Fouché were both appointed ministers, and their ability was 
conspicuously displayed at this crisis. A Congress was formed at 
Paris to arrange a final peace, and this time Prussia pressed very 
earnestly that France should be rendered powerless for the future. 
But Alexander I. was inclined to treat the conquered country gene- 
rously, and the French ministers found means to work upon his 
susceptible nature. England and Austria took the same view, and 
ultimately the second Peace of Paris was concluded on the 20th of 
November. France had to pay an indemnity of 700,000,000 frances, 
and to maintain for five years an allied army of 150,000 men in the 
chief northern fortresses. The frontier of France was on the whole 
the same as had been settled the year before, but several small 4dis- 


634 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. XXIV. 


tricts were given to Belgium and Prussia, and the king of Sardinia 
recovered the ceded portion of Savoy. Still France was larger than 
before the Revolution, as the Venaissin was twice the size of these 
last districts. Most of the works of art which Napoleon had col- 
lected had already been returned to their original homes. 

The territorial changes that followed the downfall of the Napo- 
leonic empire were too artificial to be permanent. The formation 
of national unity in Germany and Italy was. delayed, but not pre- 
vented. In Italy, Napoleon’s rule, worthless as it was in itself, 
had created a passion for unity and a feeling of enmity against the 
Hapsbnrgs and other dynasties which stood in its way, and these 
feelings were destined to ripen. In Germany, Prussia had made 
great, if unconscious, strides towards a national headship. By giv- 
ing up her Slavonic province; in the east and obtaining compensa- 
tion in the west she had become a purely German power. By the 
acquisition of the Rhenish provinces she had become the champion 
of Germany against France. All that was needed to complete the 
work was the exclusion of Austria, as a really Slavonic power, from 
German affairs, and a new war with France. These conditions 
realised, Germany was to commence a new era in its history under 
Prussian guidance. 


CHAPTER XXYV. 
EUROPE AFTER THE GREAT WAR. 


I. WEsTERN EvuRoPeE AND THE Hoty ALLIANCE.—§ 1. Formation of the 
Holy Alliance. § 2. Reaction in Germany. § 3. France under Louis 
XVII. § 4. Revolution in Spain. § 5. Revolutions in Portugal and 
Brazil. § 6. Italian governments after 1815. § 7. Revolution in 
Naples and Sicily. § 8. Congresses of Troppau and Laybach ; suppression 
of the Neapolitan constitution. § 9. Rising in Piedmont suppressed. 
§ 10. Congress of Verona; suppression of the constitutions in Spain and 
Portugal. Il. EASTERN EUROPE AND THE INDEPENDENCE OF GREECE. 
—§ 11. Condition of Turkey at the beginning of the 19th century, 
§ 12. Greek rising in 1821; rivalry of the chiefs ; Congress of Verona ; 
first four years of the war. § 13, Egyptian troops in Greece; fall 
of Missolonghi and Athens. § 14. Accession of Nicolas of Russia; 
change of policy; Convention with England. § 15. Destruction of 
the Janissaries ; Convention of Ackermann. § 16. Treaty of London; 
battle of Navarino, § 17. Russo-Turkish war, 1828-9; treaty of 
Adrianople. § 18. Establishment of the Greek kingdom. III. FRANCE 
UNDER CHARLES X, AND THE REVOLUTION OF 1830.—§ 19. Accession 
ot Charles X.; reactionary government in France; fall of Villéle. 
§ 20. Fall of Martignac; the Polignac ministry; strength of the 
opposition; Ordinances of July. § 21. The July Revolution. § 22. 
Flight of Charles X. and accession of Louis Philippe. IV. LimpERAL 
MOVEMENTS IN EUROPE.—§ 23, Results of the July Revolution, 
§ 24. Causes of discontent in Belgium; rising in Brussels. § 25, 
European intervention; the Conference of London ; election of Leopold 
of Coburg; the Dutch resort to arms; the 24 Articles; acknowledg- 
ment of Belgian independence. § 26. Revolution in Poland; disunion 
among the Poles; Russian attack upon Warsaw; suppression of the 
revolt. § 27, Constitutional movements in Germany; reaction ; con- 
ference of ministers at Vienna. § 28, Liberal movement in Switzer- 
land. § 29. Risings in Modena, the Papal States, and Parma; inter- 
vention of Austria; French occupation of Ancona. § 30. Usurpation 
of Dom Miguel in Portugal; arrival of Pedro I. from Brazil; the 
Quadruple Alliance; Maria da Gloria obtains the crown, V. THE 
REIGN OF Louis PHILIPPE.—§ 31. Difficulties of the Orleanist monar- 
chy ; the restricted franchise ; industrial discontent; socialist theories ; 
foreign politics. § 32, Ministerial changes ; insurrections; the duchess 
of Berri; Fieschi’s attempt to assassinate the king; the “‘laws of Sep- 
tember.” § 33. Parties in France; first ministry of Thiers ; its fall ; 
ministry of Molé, § 34. Louis Napoleon at Strasburg; proposed 
settlements for the royal family ; changes in the ministry ; coalition of 
1838; fall of the ministry ; interim ministry ; Thiers again premier; 
Napoleon’s body brought to Paris; the treaty of London; Louis 
Napoleon at Boulogne; fall of Thiers. § 35. The Soult-Guizot ministry, 
§ 36. Retrospect of Spanish affairs; the Spanish marriages, 


636 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. XXv. 


I. WESTERN EuROPE AND THE Hoty ALLIANCE. 


§ 1. Exeianp had done more than any other country to crush the 
power of Napoleon, but in the eyes of Europe it was Russia that had 
‘ contributed most to his final overthrow. ‘The story of the French 
invasion ‘and of the burning of Moscow had fascinated men’s minds 
and given them a profound impression of the invincible strength of 
the great eastern empire. Alexander I. found himself the greatest 
of living sovereigns and elevated to a kind of European dictator- 
ship. He became impressed with the idea that he had a divine mis- 
sion to restore peace and order to the world, and his enthusiastic 
temperament gave way to the impulses of religious superstition. 
He fell under the influence of the Baroness Krudener, a native 
of Riga, with whom he spent several hours of each day in prayer 
and consultation, At her instigation he drew up the plan of the 
famous Holy Alliance, to which he obtained the assent of the 
rulers of Austria and Prussia on the 26th of September, 1815. The 
three monarchs solemnly announced their intention of regulating 
their foreign and domestic policy by the precepts of Christianity, 
and declared that they would rule justly, promote brotherly love 
among their subjects, and do all in their power to maintain peace. 
All princes, except the Pope and the Sultan, were invited to join 
the alliance, which was to introduce a new era into Europe, and to 
prevent the recurrence of such convulsions as that which had 
lately been experienced. 

The motives which were expressed in the preamble were sincere 
at the moment, but they were the outcome of an unpractical enthu- 
siasm that was entirely out of date. The objects of the Holy Alliance 
were necessarily modified by circumstances. The Revolution had 
been apparently suppressed, but its principles survived, and to some 
extent they had been adopted by the conquerors. The French 
empire had fallen before the power of the peoples, who demanded a 
share in the government as a reward for their dangers and exertions. 
he old system of personal and irresponsible rule seemed to be an 
anachronism, and was regarded as such even by the Russian Ozar. 
Alexander I. promised a constitution to the vassal kingdom of 
Poland which the treaty of Vienna had subjected to him. Frederick 
William III. had made a similar promise to Prussia. More conspi- 
cuous still, the allies had not only permitted, but had almost com- 
pelled, Louis XVIII. to give a charter to France. It seemed likely 
that before long every country in Hurope would receive a constitu- 
tion on the model of that of England, and that the people would be 
allowed a voice in the control of taxation and expenditure. But 
these liberal principles of Alexander and his colleagues were accom 


A.D. 1815. THE HOLY ALLIANCE. . 637 


panied with important reservations. All these constitutional pri- 
vileges were to be free grants from the sovereign, any attempt 
on the part of the people to enforce concessions was regarded as 
Jacobinism, and any tendency in that direction must be suppressed 
as endangering the tranquillity of Europe. It was obvious from 
the first that this presupposed an amount of contentment among 
the subject populations that did not exist. The arrangements of 
the treaty of Vienna had been in the highest degree artificial, 
and they could not be maintained without the employment of 
force. Before long the Holy Alliance abandoned its high sound- 
ing professions and became simply a league of sovereigns against the 
people—a kind of European police to put down all liberal move- 
ments. As such as it was joined by most of the European powers 
except England, which was necessarily in sympathy with the 
constitutional aspirations on the continent, and could not honour- 
ably withhold from others the blessings which she enjoyed herself. 
But her refusal in the first instance was due rather to accident than 
to principle. ‘The Alliance was a personal league of princes, it was 
simply signed “Francis, Frederick William, Alexander.” English 
traditions made it impossible for the Prince Regent to accept a treaty 
except through the intervention of a responsible minister. But 
Castlereagh, who was foreign secretary at this time, was on the 
whole in sympathy with the reactionary policy of the great powers, 
and for some years England continued in cordial relations with her 
continental allies. 

§ 2. It was in Germany that the force of the reaction first dis- 
played itself. In Austria the old absolute government had not 
been shaken by the revolution, and was continued without opposi- 
tion. The Viennese were too careless and pleasure-loving to desire 
liberties which involved labour, and the real danger to Austria, the 
national aspirations of the Bohemians and Hungarians, had not yet 
arisen. Francis I. was a cautious and not unpopular sovereign, 
and Metternich, an amiable rowé, thought only of suppressing dis- 
order during his own generation. Aprés nous le déluge was his 
favourite sentiment. The finances were so culpably mismanaged 
that the debt continued to increase in time of peace, and the state fell 
under the control of Jewish money-lenders. In Prussia the ardent 
hopes that had been roused by the war of liberation were doomed 
to bitter disappointment. Frederick William ITI., well-meaning but 
weak, submissively followed the lead of Russia, and sought only to 
secure quiet to his exhausted country. Hardenberg, who remained 
chief minister till his death, broke off his connection with the 
reforming party and adopted the royal system. The promised con- 
stitution was withheld, and expressions of discontent were carefully 


638 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. xxv. 


suppressed. At the same time the administration was honest and 
efficient, which helped to prevent any outbreak. But Prussia lost the 
chance of assuming the leadership of Germany, and the lesser states, 
who were jealous of her influence, adopted a more liberal attitude 
as the reaction gained ground in Berlin.’ In Wurtemberg, Bavaria, 
Baden, Hanover, Brunswick, and other provinces, the rulers granted 
constitutions on the model of the French Charter. But care was 
taken not to allow popular privilege to encroach upon prerogative, 
and the machinery of the Confederation was employed to suppress 
the slightest tendency towards liberal opinions. In 1817 a sensation 
was created by a grand meeting of German students at the Wart- 
burg to celebrate the anniversary of the Reformation. Real alarm 
was professed two years later when Kotzebue, the dramatist, was 
assassinated by a student named Sand. The motive for the act 
was that Kotzebue was in correspondence with Alexander I., and 
was supposed to have warned him against the liberal spirit in 
the German universities. Metternich took advantage of this occur- 
rence to hold a conference of ministers at Carlsbad, where it was 
decided to take active measures, ‘The press was subjected to a 
rigorous censorship, the control of the universities was transferred 
to officials appointed by the government, and a commission was 
established at Mainz to examine into the supposed conspiracy and 
to punish the guilty. Metternich wished to utilise the opportu- 
nity to suppress the constitutions of the lesser states, but in this 
he was foiled. The rulers of these states wished to be popular with 
their subjects in order to strengthen ‘themselves against Austria 
and Prussia, and they were supported by the Czar, who was anxious 
to keep a hold on Germany. The commission at Mainz continued 
in activity for some years, but no real conspiracy existed, and the 
only result of its labours was the removal of a number of liberal 
professors from their chairs. 

§ 3. Few princes have ever been placed in a more difficult. posi- 
tion than that of Louis XVIII. after his second restoration in 1815. 
It is true that any open opposition was impossible as long as the 
allied troops remained in occupation of French soil; but the very 
fact that he owed his crown to foreign intervention was one of the 
creat causes of his insecurity. Under these circumstances he took 
the wisest course open to him and determined to conciliate the 
people by a punctilious observance of his engagements and by 
avoiding a revengeful and reactionary policy. But he found him- 
self confronted by vehement opposition from his own family and 
his immediate followers. A royalist reaction had set in like that 
of 1660 in England. In the southern provinces the people rose 
and massacred the Bonapartists. In Paris the emigrant nobles 


A.D. 1815-1817. LOUIS XVIII. 639 


demanded the restoration of the old régime and the punishment 
of all who were connected with the recent revolution. At the head 
of this extreme party was the king’s brother, the Count of Artois, 
whose position was the more important as he was heir-apparent to 
the throne. His residence in the Tuileries, the Pavillon Marsan, 
became the headquarters of the Ultras, and he went so far as to 
urge the revocation of the Charter. Louis XVIII. was determined 
not to yield to the solicitations of this party, or to adopt a policy 
which must inevitably lead to a new revolution as soon as the 
first force of the reaction was spent. But certain concessions had 
to be made, especially as the majority in the newly elected cham- 
bers was vehemently royalist. Talleyrand and Fouché were 
dismissed from the ministry, and their places taken by the duc de 
Richelieu, who had won an honourable reputation in the Russian 
service as the founder and governor of Odessa, and M. Decazes. 
Ney and several others who had betrayed the monarchy on 
Napoleon’s return were tried and executed. Three laws were 
proposed and carried, te put down seditious cries, to authorise 
extraordinary arrests by the government, and to create special 
military courts for the summary trial of political crimes without 
the intervention of a jury. But here the government determined 
to stop, and when the majority of the chambers demanded more 
extreme measures and clamoured against the granting of an amnesty 
to traitors, Louis dissolved them, On the 5th of September, 1816, 
he issued an edict on his own authority, which made important 
changes in the system of representation. The number of deputies 
was reduced from 394 to 260, and the franchise, as settled by the 
Charter, was secured to all who paid 300 francs in direct taxes. 
The measure was a coup d’état in the liberal interest, and it was 
for the moment completely successful. The moderate party was in 
a majority in the new chamber of deputies, and the danger from the 
royalists was averted. But the change involved serious dangers in 
the future. A fifth of the chamber had to be renewed every year, 
and it was almost certain that the new elections would be more and 
more liberal in their character. Neither the king nor Richelieu 
were prepared to free themselves from the party of reaction in order 
to fall into the hands of the radicals. 

But at first this danger was overlooked, the ministry and the 
legislature were in accord with each other, and a good opportunity 
seemed to present itself for freeing France from the expensive 
humiliation of its foreign garrison. In 1817 a part of the allied 
troops was recalled and the moderation of Alexander I., who-wished 
France to be strong enough to balance the other western powers, 
obtained a diminution of the indemnity which was to be paid before 


640 MODERN EUROPE. ' CHAP, xxv. 


the occupation altogether ceased. In September, 1818, a great 
Congress of princes and ministers met at Aix-la-Chapelle. Here it 
was agreed that the occupation of French territory should entirely 
cease by the 30th of November, five years before the stipulated date. 
Next to the Czar the chief advocate of this generous act was the 
duke of Wellington, who had won universal respect as commander 
of the allied army. At the same time France was admitted to 
a share with the other great powers in regulating the affairs of 
Europe. By a treaty which was drawn up in November, the five 
powers, the ** pentarchy ” as they were called, pledged themselves to 
act in concord for the maintenance of European peace. In case 
of any disturbance measures were to be concerted at a congress, 
either of the sovereigns themselves or of their chief ministers. 

This signal diplomatic triumph seemed to give additional secu- 
rity to the ministry of Richelieu. But he was troubled by the in- 
creasing liberal majority in the chamber of deputies, and especially 
by the elections of 1818, at which Lafayette, Manuel, and Benja- 
min Constant were returned. He attributed these disasters to the 
edict of September, 1818, which gave a majority of votes to the 
lower middle class, and he became convinced of the necessity of 
again changing the electoral law. As the king refused to recognise 
this necessity, Richelieu resigned in December, and Decazes became 
head of a purely liberal ministry. A number of popular measures 
followed. The censorship was abolished and trial by jury was 
established for cases concerning the press. ‘To prevent opposition 
from the upper chamber the king consented to the creation of 
sixty new peers, nearly all of whom were men who had occupied 
important positions under the empire. The royalists were in 
despair, and the count of Artois maintained that his brother must 
have lost his senses. But Louis XVIII. soon discovered that even 
these enormous concessions had failed to conciliate the extreme 
liberals either to the crown or to the ministry. One of the chief 
causes of complaint was an agreement that had been made with 
the Pope, by which Napoleon’s concordat was annulled, and the 
old concordat between Francis I. and Leo X, (1516) was restored. 
Decazes found himself attacked on both sides, and at last began to 
meditate some modification of the electoral edict of 1816. But 
while the matter was being discussed an event happened which com- 
pletely revolutionised French politics. On the 13th of February, 
1820, the duke of Berry, second son of the Count of Artois, was 
assassinated by aman named Louvel. His death was the more impor- 
tant because his elder brother, the duke of Angouléme, was childless, 
and it was to the duke of Berry that men looked for a continuation 
of the royal line. He had been married in 1816 to Caroline Mary, 


A.D. 1818-1821. FERDINAND VII. OF SPAIN. 641 


granddaughter of the king of Naples, who was already the mother 
of a daughter, and who was pregnant at the time of her husband’s 
murder. An irresistible royalist reaction now set in, Decazes had 
to resign, and Richelieu once more undertook the direction of affairs, 
with the support of the right instead of the left in the chambers. 
The censorship of the press was re-established and.a new electoral 
Jaw was introduced, which placed the election of half the deputies 
in the hands of the wealthy classes. The feeling in favour of the 
crown was increased by two events, the birth of a son, Henry duke 
of Bordeaux, to the duchess of Berry in September, 1820, and the 
death of the late emperor at St. Helena on the 5th of May, 1821. 
In December, 1821, Richelieu, who found himself more and more 
out of harmony with the Ultras, resigned office for the secund time, 
and was succeeded by Villéle, the recognised leader of the royalist 
party. From this time Louis XVIII., whose energy declined with 
advancing years, and who fell under the influence of Madame du 
Cayla, practically resigned his authority to the count of Artois. 
Another change in the constitution, which abolished the annual 
election of a fifth of the deputies, and authorised the chamber to sit 
for seven years, secured the victory of the reactionary party. 

§ 4. Nothing illustrates more clearly the wisdom of Louis XVII. 
than a comparison of the policy pursued by another restored 
Bourbon, Ferdinand VII. of Spain. When Ferdinand was released by 
Napoleon. at the beginning of 1814, Spain was still governed by the 
Cortes which had been created under the constitution of 1812. At 
first the king undertook to maintain this form of government, but 
on arriving on Spanish soil he discovered that the liberal adminis- 
tration was ‘by no means popular among the peasants and was 
detested by the priests. Ferdinand was a worthless and incapable 
prince, who had learned nothing in his four years’ captivity except 
an aptitude for lying and intrigue, and who was subject to two 
guiding passions, sensuality and superstition. From Valencia he 
issued an edict dissolving the Cortes and promising a new constitu- 
tion in place of that of 1812. So strong was the reaction in favour 
of the monarchy that this measure was hailed with applause, and 
the king entered Madrid in triumph. No sooner was he established 
on the throne than he threw his promises to the wind and restored 
the old absolutism with all its abuses. The nobles recovered their 
privileges and their exemption from taxes, the monasteries were 
restored, the Inquisition resumed its activity, and the Jesuits 
returned to Spain. All Liberals and all adherents of Joseph 
Bonaparte were ruthlessly persecuted. ‘The government was con- 
ducted by a camarilla of worthless courtiers and_priests,. wno 
encouraged the king to fresh acts of reactionary violence. For six 

29 


642 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. xxv. 


years this royalist reign of terror was continued, and the suppression 
of isolated revolts gave occasion for new cruelties. ‘The finances of 
the country were in the most wretched condition, owing to the loss 
of the American colonies, which had taken advantage of Napoleon’s 
conquest of Spain to establish their independence. Instead of 
trying to restore prosperity by maintaining peace, Ferdinand 
squandered large sums upon futile expeditions to recover the 
colonies. One of his expedients for raising money was the sale of 
Florida to the United States in 1819. Discontent in Spain found 
expression in numerous secret societies, for which the model was 
found in Italy. It was among the soldiers, neglected and ill-paid, 
that these societies found their most numerous and active ad- 
herents. At last, in 1820, the standard of revolt was raised at Cadiz 
by Riego and Quiroga, two officers of an expedition that had been 
prepared for South America. Vigorous action at the outset might 
have crushed the rising, but Ferdinand and his advisers were as 
incapable as they were tyrannical, and before long the movement 
had spread over the whole country. In March the king gave way 
and accepted the constitution of 1812. The royalists, the serviles 
as they were called, were dismissed from office and their places 
taken by liberals. The Cortes met in July, and at once proceeded 
to dissolve the monasteries and the Inquisition, to confiscate the 
clerical tithes, to abolish entails, and to secure freedom for the press 
and for popular meetings. At first the moderate party, headed by 
Martinez de la Rosa, endeavoured to suppress disorder and to 
establish a durable constitutional government. But this the king 
was determined to prevent, and the moderates were defeated by a 
factious combination of royalists and radicals. Risings of the loyal 
and bigoted peasants in the provinces were suppressed, and con- 
tributed to the victory of the extreme party. In 1822 the election 
of Riego as president of the Cortes seemed to mark the final 
triumphs of the revolution in Spain. 

§ 5. The rising in Spain gave the signal for similar movements in 
other countries. Portugal, as being the nearest, was the first to 
feel the impulse. The Portuguese had many grievances to com- 
plain of. On the first invasion of Marshal Junot the royal family 
had fled to Brazil. When, in 1816, the death of Maria gave the 
crown to the former regent, John VI., he continued to reside in 
Rio Janeiro as ruler of the United Kingdom of Portugal, Brazil, and 
the Algarves. ‘Che government of Portugal was entrusted to a 
council of regency at Lisbon. But the real power was in the 
hands of Lord Beresford, who remained commander-in-chief of the 
army after the conclusion of the war. ‘The Portuguese were 
‘naturally indignant that their country should be ruled by a 


A.D. 1819-1822. REVOLUTION IN PORTUGAL. 643 


foreigner, and that it should be treated as an appendage of one of 
its own colonies. In August, 1820, the events in Spain encouraged 
a rising, for which a convenient opportunity was given by the 
absence of Beresford at Rio. A revolutionary junta was established 
at Oporto and speedily obtained adherents in the other towns. 
The council of regency was compelled to abdicate, and a constitution 
was introduced on the model of that of Spain. Lord Beresford was 
refused admittance to Lisbon and had to sail to England, but the 
government refused to interfere in the internal affairs of Portugal. 
At the same time the revolutionary movement spread to Brazil, 
where it found a supporter in the king’s eldest son, Don Pedro. 
The result was that John VI. had to resign the administration to his 
son, and with the rest of his family sailed to Lisbon, where he 
arrived on the 3rd of July, 1821. Here he was compelled to 
accept the constitution which had been established in his absence. 
These events were followed by the formal separation of Brazil from 
Portugal. ‘The Cortes at Lisbon was determined to reduce the 
powerful colony to its former independence, and orders were sent 
to Don Pedro to return to Portugal. ‘The prince, convinced that 
such a step would result in the loss of Brazil to the house of 
Braganza, refused obedience, and was supported by his subjects. In 
1822 he was proclaimed Emperor of Brazil and adopted a con- 
stitution. The northern provinces, which were averse to a separa- 
tion from the mother-country, were reduced to obedience with the 
help of the English admiral, Lord Cochrane. 

§ 6. In Italy the house of Hapsburg had recovered even more 
than its old predominance by the treaty of Vienna. ‘The instinct 
of self-preservation impelled Austria to do all in its power to crush 
the tendencies towards self-rule or national unity which had been 
aroused during the Napoleonic period. In the provinces of Lom- 
bardy and Venice a carefully organised system of espionage and 
police, with an active censorship of the press, reduced the people to 
dumb, if unsatisfied, submission. But for absolute security it was 
necessary that the other states of the peninsula should pursue the 
same system, so that there should be no ground for jealous com- 
parisons. ‘This object was also obtained. ‘The rulers of Parma 
and Modena obeyed the slightest hint from Vienna, and anxiously 
copied the Austrian administration in every detail. In Rome, 
Pius VII., and still more his successor, Leo XII., strove success- 
fully to restore the old traditions of priestly rule. In Tuscany, 
Ferdinand III. allowed a certain freedom of thought and expression, 
and Florence became a refuge for men whose utterances were 
checked elsewhere. But the grand duke was too much of a 
Hapsburg to extend this liberty to politics ; all popular institutions 


644 MODERN EUROPE. CaP. xxv. 


were suppressed, the police were as active as in Milan, and the 
people were encouraged to forget public affairs in a life of indolent 
pleasure. In Naples the aged Ferdinand I. owed his restoration 
to Austria, and was thus compelled, even if he had not wished it 
himself, to suppress all Jiberal tendencies. One of his first acts on 
recovering his independence was to revoke the constitution which 
he had given to Sicily while he was under the guidance of the 
English admiral, Lord Bentinck. Any energy that was wanting to 
the king himself was amply supplied by his wife, Caroline, who 
constantly urged her husband to fresh precautions against revolu- 
tion. But the province in which the reaction was most thoroughly 
carried out was Piedmont. During the French occupation the 
king, Victor Emmanuel, had lived quietly in the island of Sardinia, 
completely untouched by all that was passing on the continent. 
He returned to Turin with all the prejudices and prepossessions 
of a system that was thoroughly out of date. Regardless of the 
confusion and absurdity that was involved in such an act, he issued 
an edict which abolished all laws and regulations introduced by 
the French, and restored the government as it had existed in 
1770. Even the new roads were abandoned, and it was almost 
decided to destroy the bridge which Napoleon had built across the 
Po. As compared with the system pursued at Turin the Austrian 
government of Milan appeared liberal and far-seeing. But liberal 
opinions survived in Piedmont and were nourished by the neigh- 
bourhood of France. Among their adherents was a member of the 
royal house, Charles Albert, Prince of Carignano. As both Victor 
Emmanuel and his brother Charles Felix were childless, Charles 
Albert was the legitimate heir to the throne. But so strong was 
the reaction, that the idea was entertained of disinheriting him, and 
securing the succession to the archduke Francis IV. of Modena, 
who had married a daughter of Victor Hehe and whose re- 
actionary principles were above suspicion. 

§ 7. Although the government of the Italian provinces corre- 
sponded so exactly to the wishes of Austria, there was still some 
ground for uneasiness in the numerous secret societies which 
covered the whole country. The most important and active of 
these was the famous Carbonars, which eagerly watched for an 
opportunity of overthrowing foreign despotism and effecting the 
simultaneous union and freedom of Italy. The first opening for 
active measures was given by the effect of the Spanish revolution 
in Naples, always closely connected with Spain by dynastic ties. 
Here, as in Spain, the movement originated with the army. The 
garrison of Nola raised the first cry for the Spanish constitution, 
other troops followed the example, and General Pepé, a popular 


A.D. 1815—1820. THE TWO SICILIES. 645 


officer, assumed the lead of the rebellion. No semblance of resist- 
ance was made by Ferdinand I., who at once undertook to form a 
liberal ministry and to take the oath to the constitution, of the 
provisions of which both he and the rebels were completely 
ignorant. In four days the revolution was accomplished without 
disturbance, and the king even went out of his way to express his 
gratitude to General Pepé and his determination to uphold the new 
system. 

Very different was the course of events in Sicily, where the 
people hated the Neapolitans and wished to break off the connection 
between the two kingdoms. The news reached Palermo on the 
festival of St. Rosalia (14 July, 1820), the patron saint of the city. 
A wild tumult followed, in which a number of lives were lost, and 
the governor and other officials escaped with difficulty. Envoys 
were sent to Naples to demand legislative independence and a free 
constitution. But the Neapolitans were indignant at the excesses 
that had disgraced the movement in Sicily, and were eager to 
maintain their hold over the island. An army was sent under 
Florestan Pepé, brother of the popular hero, to enforce obedience, 
and Palermo, after an obstinate resistance, was compelled to yield. 

§ 8. The rapid spread of revolution in Europe inspired serious 
misgivings among the great powers, and impelled the Holy 
Alliance to show its true colours. ‘Austria was especially alarmed 
by the movement in Naples, which threatened to overthrow its 
power in Italy, and Metternich convoked a congress at Troppau, in 
Upper Silesia (Oct., 1820), at which Austria, Russia, Prussia, 
France and England were represented. Neapolitan affairs were 
the chief subject of discussion, and it was soon evident that 
Austria, Russia and Prussia were agreed as to the necessity of 
armed intervention. England made a formal protest against such 
high-handed treatment of a peaceful country; but as the protest 
was not supported by France, and England was not prepared to go 
to war for Naples, it was disregarded. The three allied powers 
decided to transfer the congress to Laybach and to invite Ferdi- 
nand I. to attend in person. The news of this decision made a 
profound impression in Naples, but the king was allowed to depart 
after he had made a solemn promise to adhere to the constitution, 
and to defend it before the other sovereigns. During his absence 
the administration was entrusted to his son Francis, who proved to 
be as profound a master of deceit as his father. The question of 
principle having been settled at Troppau there was no need for long 
discussions at Laybach. Ferdinand I. had no idea of observing 
his promises, and it was decided that an Austrian army should 
march into Naples to restore his authority. On the 5th of 


646 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP, Xxv. 


February 60,000 Austrian troops started from. Lombardy under 
General Frimont. The Neapolitans determined to resist; but their 
leaders were divided, the inhabitants of the country were not 
devoted to the cause, and all patriotic efforts were impeded by the 
treacherous intrigues of the regent. Pepé was defeated in an en- 
gagement at Rieti and his troops deserted him. Without further 
opposition the Austrians entered Naples on the 24th of March. A 
small detachment was sufficient to reduce Sicily. Ferdinand I. 
took a terrible revenge upon his opponents, and those who were 
fortunate enough to escape the scaffold had to seek safety in exile. 
§ 9. It was fortunate for Austria that no effective resistance 
was made by the Neapolitans, for directly after the departure of the 
troops from Lombardy a revolution broke out in Piedmont. It was 
effected by a combination of the liberals, who wished to establish 
constitutional government, with the officers of the army, who were 
anxious to free Piedmont from Austrian tutelage. The aged king, 
Victor Emmanuel, was unable to resist a movement that appeared 
unanimous, and sought to evade the difficulty by abdicating in 
favour of his brother, Charles Felix (12 March). As the latter was 
absent in Modena, the administration was entrusted to Charles 
Albert of Carignano. The latter was placed in a very difficult 
position. Personally he sympathised with the revolution, but on 
the other hand he was afraid of losing his chance of the succession 
if he alienated Austria. His first act was to proclaim the Spanish 
constitution, and to appoint a new ministry, in which Santa Rosa, 
the leader of the military party, had a place. But at the same 
time he sent to Modena to justify these measures on the plea of 
necessity, and to profess his obedience to Charles Felix.. The new 
king replied by condemning all that had been done, and expressed his 
intention of appealing for support to the Holy Alliance. On receipt 
of this answer Charles Albert felt that his position was untenable, 
and fled to Novara, where he formally resigned his authority. At 
the same time Austrian troops crossed the Ticino aud speedily 


suppressed the revolt. As Victor Emmanuel persisted in abdicating, — 


Charles Felix ascended the throne and restored the old system, but 
without any of the cruelties that disgraced the reaction in Naples. 
Austria urged that Charles Albert should be disinherited as an 
accomplice in the revolution, but the strong family feeling of the 
house of Savoy prevented Charles Felix from giving his consent. 
But the prince had to absent himself from the kingdom for the 
next two years, and to give proofs of his severance from the liberal 
party. 

§ 10. Meanwhile the disorders in Spain continued, and a rebellion 
broke out in Greece against the Turks. In October, 1822, another 


A.D. 1821-1823. FRENCH INTERVENTION IN SPAIN. 647 


European congress met at Verona to consider these matters, ‘The 
French Government, which was now wholly in the hands of the 
royalists, maintained that any intervention in Spain must be under- 
taken by France, just as the intervention in Naples had been 
entrusted to Austria, A French army had been already drawn up 
on the frontiers, on the pretext that it was a necessary precaution 
against the yellow fever, which had broken out with terrible violence 
in Spain. Austria, Russia and Prussia were inclined to distrust 
France, and favoured the plan of a combined invasion by the allied 
forces of Europe. On the other hand, Canning, who had become 
foreizn minister on the death of Castlereagh, sent the duke of 
Wellington to Verona with instructions to protest against any 
armed intervention whatever. Ultimately the four powers deter- 
mined to demand from the Spanish government an alteration of 
the constitution and greater liberty for the king. It was under- 
stood that in case of an unsatisfactory answer being received, France 
would take active measures with the authority of the other three 
states. As the Spanish ministers rejected the demand of the 
powers, all the ambas-adors except the English envoy left Madrid, 
and the French army, 100,000 strong, entered Spain under the 
duke of Angouléme (April, 1823). No effective resistance was 
made, and Madrid was entered on the 23rd of May. But the 
Cortes had carried the king to Seville, and on the approach of the 
French they retreated to Cadiz. ‘The last resistance was overcome 
by a bombardment of the city, and on the 1st of October Ferdinand 
VII. was released. His first act was to revoke everything that 
had been done since the beginning of 1820. The Inquisition was 
not restored, but the secular tribunals took a terrible vengeance 
on the revolutionary leaders. The duke of Angouléme protested 
against these cruelties, but in vain. Even the fear of revolt, 
the last check upon despotism, was removed by the presence of 
the French troops, which remained in Spain till 1827, As a 
protest azainst this occupation, which he had been unable to 
prevent, Canning acknowledged the independence of the Spanish 
colonies. 

Once more events in Portugal followed the example of those in 
Spain. For some time the reactionary party had been gaining in 
strength, and the news of French intervention in the neighbouring 
country gave it an easy triumph. The Cortes, deserted both by 
the people and the army, dissolved itself, and absolute government 
was restored. John VI., a careless and easy-tempered ruler, wished 
to issue a general amnesty and to grant a new constitution. But 
his wife, a sister of Ferdinand VII., and her second son, Dom 
Miguel, a monster of bigotry and cruelty, were determined to punish 


648 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. xxv. 


the conquered party. The king found himself a prisoner in his own 
palace, his favourite minister, Loulé, was murdered, and the queen 
aimed at her husband’s deposition and the elevation of Miguel to 
the throne. At last John VI. escaped to an English ship in the 
Tagus (May 9, 1824), and the people rallied to his cause. Miguel 
obtained his father’s forgiveness, but retired to Vienna, whence he 
returned after John’s death to bring further troubles on his country. 

For the time the Holy Alliance had triumphed, and the revolu- 
tionary movement in western Europe seemed to be suppressed. 
But the resolute attitude which Canning had assumed at the 
Congress of Verona and in subsequent negotiations had broken up 
the pentarchy, and deprived the decisions of the other powers of 
the unity which was necessary for permanence. ‘The death of 
Alexander I, in 1825 gave a final blow to a league which must 
either have crushed the growth of liberty in Europe, or have led to 
another continental war, not less general and destructive than that 


which had been aroused by the French Revolution. :/ 


II. EAstern EvrorE AND THE INDEPENDENCE OF GREECE. 


§ 11. One of the services which the house of Hapsburg rendered 
to Europe was the defence of the eastern frontier against the 
aggressions of the Turks. ‘The victories of Montecuculi and Eugene 
destroyed for ever the terror which the Ottoman arms had once 
inspired. All the successes of Austria, and the treaties of Carlowitz 
(1699) and Passarowitz (1718), by which those successes were 
secured, had been not only acquiesced in but eagerly welcomed and 
exulted over by the other European states. The infidel was the 
common enemy of all Christian nations. But in the latter half of 
the 18th century the great eastern question entered a new phase. 
Russia began to make rapid strides southwards and obtained a 
permanent hold upon the Black Sea. The ultimate acquisition of 
Constantinople became an acknowledged object of the house of 
Romanof. Catharine II. had taken a great step in this direction 
by establishing a sort of Russian protectorate over the Christian 
population of Turkey in the treaty of Kutschuk Kainardji; she 
had inscribed over the entrance to the Chersonese “the way to 
Constantinople ;” and she had given the name of Constantine to 
her second grandson as if he were the destined successor of the 
Paleologi. Alexander I. had pursued the same policy of aggression 
after the treaty of Tilsit, and although the French invasion com- 
pelled him to conclude the peace of Bucharest, he succeeded in 
extending his frontier to the Pruth, and in reserving the right of 
Russia to interfere in the domestic affairs of Turkey. But these 


se nati Haas eenstaitatinla nit a inne ee Dy pm 


—_—- = 


A.D. 1789-1825. CONDITION OF TURKEY. 649 


advances, unlike those of Austria, were by no means welcomed by 
the other powers. The rapid growth of the great Slavonic empire 
was regarded as one of the great dangers to western Europe. From 
this time the western nations, and especially England and France, 
began to recognise the necessity of supporting the Mohammedan 
Sultan rather than allow Constantinople to fall into the hands of 
the Christian Czar. 

The decline of the Turkish power, as has been seen before, was 
not only due to external defeats at the hands of Austria and Russia, 
but still more to internal disorders. The authority of the Sultan 
was perpetually checked by the haughty independence of the 
dreaded Janissaries, who played the part of the Praetorian guards at 
Rome, and made a puppet of the sovereign whom it was their 
function to defend. Selim III. (1789-1807) had sought to free 
himself from this military oligarchy by forming a new army on the 
European model, and had paid the penalty for his boldness by 
deposition and death. His nephew and successor, Mustafa 1V., had 

‘only ruled a year before he also was murdered. Mahmoud II. 
(1808-1839), a brother of Mustafa, and a man of considerable energy 
and resolution, was compelled to purchase his throne by accepting 
all the demands of the infuriated soldiers, and by promising to 
abandon all thought of reform. It is true that he only awaited the 
first opportunity to break his promise, but in the meanwhile he was 
as powerless as his predecessors, Another source of weakness to 
the Turks was the independence assumed by the pashas of distant 
provinces. ‘Two conspicuous illustrations of this existed in the 
time of Mahmoud. In Egypt, Mehemet Ali, a native of Macedonia, 
had taken advantage of the disturbances that followed the struggle 
between the English and French to obtain his nomination as pasha. 
In that position he had crushed every element of resistance, and 
was able to treat his nominal sovereign as an equal. Nearer home, 
Ali. Pasha, the famous “ Lion of Jannina,” had thrown off the 
Sultan’s yoke, and was enabled, by the strength of his island fortress, 
to defy the forces that were sent against him. ‘Two other officials, 
the Hospodars of Moldavia and Wallachia, who were nominated 
by the Porte, were far more under the authority of Russia. 

§ 12. These and other difficulties in the way of Ottoman rule 
must have led to the speedy disruption of the empire, but for the 
military prowess of the ‘lurks and the divisions of the subject 
populations. ‘The four races that inhabited European Turkey— 
Slavs, Roumans, Albanians, and Greeks—were not only hostile to 
each other, but were again subdivided among themselves by 
differences of religion and by geographical boundaries. Of these 


races the most active and intelligent, the Greeks, were also the 
29% 


650 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. XXxv. 


least numerous. The old inhabitants of Greece had been almost 
lost among the numerous immigrants who had settled in the 
peninsula since its conquest by the Romans. The mass of the 
population consisted of Slavs, and the old name of Peloponnese had 
long given way to the Slavonic appellation of the Morea. In spite 
of this the scholars of western Europe were in the habit of re- 
garding the Greeks as the descendants of the ancient Hellenes, and 
this was sufficient to secure them general sympathy in a struggle 
against Turkish misrule. At the Congress of Vienna great efforts 
had been made to do something for the cause of the Greeks, and a 
literary society of their admirers (€raipeta diAopovoay) derived 
political importance from the fact that one of its leading members, 
Count Capo d'Istria, was secretary to Alexander I. The Czar had 
an obvious interest in the cause, and was believed by many to be 
himself a member of a secret committee of Philhellenes. The 
risings in Spain and Naples gave the necessary impulse to a move- 
ment which had been already prepared. It was commenced, not in 
Greece itself, but in Moldavia, because that province was near to 
Russia, from which help was confidently expected. The revolt was 
headed by Ipsilanti, an officer in the Russian service, whose father 
had been Hospodar of Moldavia. Ipsilanti was a Phanariote—i.e. 
he belonged to one of the old Greek families who lived in the 
- Phanar, a suburb of Constantinople. The Phanariotes had long 
been in intimate connection with Russia, and it was from among 
them that the Porte usually selected the Hospodars of Moldavia 
and Wallachia. Ipsilanti’s rising depended entirely for success on 
Russian support, but at the Congress of Laybach Alexander ex- 
pressed his disapproval, and it speedily collapsed. The Turks won 
a complete victory at Dragatschan (19 June, 1821), and Ipsilanti 
spent the next seven years in an Austrian prison. But his move- 
ment had been the preconcerted signal for another and more 
general rebellion in Greece proper. Under the leadership of 
Kolokotroni, Nikitas, Pietro Bey and others, the people rose all over 
the Morea, and in a few days the Turks were driven to the 
fortresses, where they were speedily besieged. The rich islands of 
the Aigean, Hydra, Ipsara, and Spezzia, espoused the national 
cause, and the skill and daring of their sailors gave the Greeks a 
maritime superiority which was of decisive importance in the 
war. Ali Pasha, of Jannina, having quarrelled irretrievably with 
the Porte, took the side of the Greeks, though he remained a 
Mohammedan. He rendered considerable service by concentrating 
against himself the main force of the Turks for a year, thus 
leaving the Greeks time to gain a firm position. North of the 
isthmus of Corinth, Odysseus, a famous chieftain of the mountain 


A.D. 1821—1822. REVOLT OF GREECE. 651 


tribes, revolted against the Turks and barred their passage into 
the Morea. The Porte was wholly unprepared for war, and 
though the garrisons of Patras and Nauplia repulsed their 
besiegers, the important fortress of Tripolitza was taken by storm. 
The ‘lurks could only avenge their disasters by the murder 
of the Greek Patriarch in Constantinople and by massacres of 
the Christian population in Asia Minor. ‘These cruelties led to 
reprisals on the part of the rebels, and gave the war a bloodthirsty 
character. ' 

At the beginning of the year 1822, a national convention met in 
Piada and drew up a constitution. The executive power was en- 
trusted to a convention of five members and the work of legislation 
to a council of seventy. The president of the convention was 
Mavrocordato, the descendant of an old family of Chios, but he was 
regarded with jealousy by the military leaders, and especially by Ko- 
lokotroni. From the first the movement was hampered by personal 
quarrels and divisions. One party looked to Russia for assistance, 
another to England, while several chiefs, notably Odysseus and Pietro 
Bey, were fighting mainly for plunder. A great blow was dealt to 
the canse by the defeat and death of Ali Pasha (Feb. 1822), which 
enabled the Turkish army to leave Jannina and to turn against the 
Greeks. In spite cf this the balance of success during the year was 
decidedly in favour of the rebels. ‘The Turkish fleet captured the 
island of Chios and massacred or enslaved all the inhabitants, but 
their atrocities were avenged by the destruction of several of their 
largest vessels by fire-ships, in the management of which the islanders 
were proficient. A grand expedition which Chourchid Pasha, the 
conqueror of Jannina, led into the Morea, was repulsed with such loss 
that the commander had to escape the bowstring by suicide. The 
first siege of Missolonghi was triumphantly defeated, the citadels of 
Athens and Corinth were reduced, and finally, Nauplia (Napoli di 
Romania) was compelled to surrender. 

In spite of these successes it seemed probable that the Greeks 
must ultimately succumb to superior force unless they could obtain 
the active assistance as well as the sympathy of Europe. ‘The 
question of intervention was seriously discussed at the Congress 
of Verona, but in fatal conjunction with the question of Spain. 
Metternich, at this time the guiding spirit of European diplomacy, 
succeeded in representing the movements in the two peninsulas as 
identical in character. Alexander I., the natural champion of Greek 
independence, and a few years ago the professed adherent of liberal 
principles, was worked upon through his dread’of revolution. He 
himself declared that he “ discerned the revolutionary march in the 
troubles of the Peloponnese, and from that moment kept aloof from 


652 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. xxv. 


them.” By a curious inversion of interests, the English minister 
Canning, by policy the opponent of Russian influence in Turkey, was 
personally an eager champion of the Greek cause. But he could not 
venture to take the initiative, and the practical result of the Congress 
was a decision that the Greeks, as rebels against legitimate authority, 
should be left to their fate. It is true that the Russian envoy 
protested against the Turkish cruelties, and when satisfaction was 
refused quitted Constantinople. But even this diplomatic rupture 
did not impel Alexander to desert the neutrality that was enjoined 
by his new principles. 

In 1823-the quarrels among the Greek leaders blazed more fiercely 
than ever. Th» central government lost all authority and Mavro- 
cordato had to escape to Hydra. Still the Turks were unable to seize 
the advantages offered to them. Omer Brione, the successor of Ali 
in the Pashalic of Jannina, was defeated by the Suliote hero, Marcos 
Bozzaris, who lost his lifein the engagement. The threatened attack 
upon Missolonghi was averted by this victory, and in the Morea 
Nikitas succeeded in reducing the citadel of Corinth. In the next 
year a great impulse was given to the rebellion by the efforts of 
foreign enthusiasts. Lord Byron and Colonel Stanhope appeared in 
Greece, and a large loan on the part of foreign capitalists restored 
credit to the constitutional government. Mavrocordato returned, and 
his chief opponent, Kolokotroni, was compelled to submit. At the 
same time Odysseus, who was suspected of intrigues with the Turks, 
was seized and imprisoned at Athens. The Turkish fleet succeeded 
in capturing and devastating the island of Ipsara (July, 1824), but 
Canaris took a signal revenge by destroying more than twenty of 
the enemy’s ships. ‘The European powers began to take an interest 
in a movement that had shown itself so difficult to suppress. Can- 
ning expressed the willingness of England to recognise the Greek 
blockade, and Alexander I. proposed that Greece should be divided 
between four Hospodars, who should occupy the same relation to the 
Porte as the rulers of Moldavia and Wallachia. This scheme, how- 
ever, offered too many advantages to Russia to be accepted by the 
other powers, and Metternich succeeded for a time in averting any 
active intervention. | 

§ 13. For four years the Greeks had more than held their own, but 
their resources were so limited that victory was as costly to them 
as defeat was to the Turks. And their incorrigible dissensions alien- 
ated their foreign supporters. ‘The loans were uselessly squandered, 
and Byron died of fever and disappointment in the swamps of Mis- 
solonghi. In 1825-a wholly new character was given to the war by 
the arrival of an army from Egypt. Mehemet Ali, who hoped to 
succeed to the position of the house of Othman, determined to pre- 


: 
> 
4th 


A.D. 1823-1827. ACCESSION OF NICOLAS. 653 


vent the rupture of an empire which he might one day rule. In 
February his son, Ibrahim, landed at Modon with 17,000 men. 
From the first it was evident that the Greeks were no match for the 
Egyptian troops, who had been carefully formed and trained on the 
Kuropean model. Ibrahim captured Navarino and Tripolitza, and 
advanced through the Morea to the walls of Nauplia. At the same 
time Redschid Pasha was despatched by the Sultan to resume the 
siege of Missolonghi. Early in 1826 Ibrahim joined the Turks, and 
the fate of the town was secured by a rigorous blockade. After 
enduring the most terrible hardships, the garrison made a heroic 
effort to cut their way through the besiegers, and only accident 
prevented their complete success (2 April, 1826). The fall of Mis- 
solonghi was followed by the siege of Athens. Another obstinate 
defence was made, but in spite of the assistance rendered by Colonel 
Fabvier, Lord Cochrane, and General Church, Athens had to surrender 
(2 June, 1827). The Greek cause was hopeless unless the European 
powers would interfere, and the old dissensions broke out again. 
Fortunately for the Greeks events had occurred which altered 
the relations of the European states, and frustrated Metternich’s 
determination to uphold the Porte as the champion of legitimate 
authority against revolution. 

§ 14. On the 1st of December, 1825, Alexander I. died suddenly 
on a journey to the Crimea. As he left no children, his natural 
successor. was his brother, Constantine, who resided in Warsaw 
as governor of Poland. But Constantine, who had contracted a 
morganatic marriage with a Polish princess, and who was devoid of 
ambition, had in 1822 formally renounced all claims in favour of 
his younger brother, Nicolas. This renunciation had never been 
made public, and Nicolas, unwilling to act upon it until it had 
been confirmed, caused the troops to swear fealty to Constantine, 
as Alexander’s successor. But the elder brother positively refused 
to ascend the throne, and Nicolas was compelled to assume the 
authority that now devolved upon him. But unexpected difficulties 
confronted him. Alexander’s desertion of liberal principles in his 
later years had alienated the affection of his subjects, and a secret 
association had been formed, under Prince T'roubetskoi, with the 
object of forming Russia into a federal republic. The uncertainty 
about the ‘succession and the consequent interregnum gave the 
conspirators an unexpected opportunity. They persuaded the 
soldiers that Constantine’s pretended renunciation was a fraud, and 
that Nicolas was trying to usurp his brother’s throne. The result 
was that, when the troops were called upon to take a new oath of 
fealty, a. cry was raised for Constantine, and the tumult went so far 
that artillery had to be employed, and the disloyal regiments were 


654 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP Xxv. 


almost destroyed before they would yield. The conspiracy was 
now discovered and its leaders punished. 

The accession of Nicolas brought with it a complete change in 
both the internal and foreign politics of Russia. From the first 
moment he abandoned the system pursued by his predecessors from 
Peter the Great downwards. Instead of attempting to civilise 
Russia by introducing the customs and laws of western Europe, he 
showed himself an ardent partisan of all the old national institu- 
tions, and especially of the Greek church. The Russian language 
was ordered to be taught in the German and Polish provinces, and 
a knowledge of it was essential for a place in the public service. If 
a foreigner married a Russian their children must be educated in 
the faith of the latter. The zeal for proselytism only just stopped 
short of actual persecution. At the same time Nicolas claimed to 
be the head and protector of all members of the Greek church 
outside his own dominions. It was evident that his attitude in the 
eastern question would be very different from that of Alexander, 
and that it would be determined by the interests of Russia rather 
than by the principles of legitimacy. The Holy Alliance had been 
shaken by the conduct of Canning; it' was shattered by the 
accession of Nicolas. Metternich lost the control of European 
diplomacy which he had contrived to hold for the last ten years. 

Canning lost no time in sending Wellington to St. Fetersburg to 
discuss the question of Greece with the Czar. At first Nicolas 
haughtily declared that his relations with the Porte concerned no 
other power, but he soon saw the advantage of making England his 
accomplice in a partition of Turkey. In April, 1826, a secret con- 
vention was signed, which arranged that Greece should be formed 
into a regular state, but should pay tribute to the Sultan. In case 
of refusal the two powers were to compel the Porte to accept these 
terms. The other powers were to be invited to join the alliance. 

§ 15. At the same time Nicolas had other matters to settle with 
the Sultan, and Mahmoud II. played into his hands by choosing 
this very moment for the reforms which he had been meditating 
ever since his accession. He issued an ordinance altering the 
constitution of the Janissaries, though it left the existing members 
of the corps in enjoyment of their privileges. ‘The result was a 
general mutiny on the 14thof June. But the Sultan was prepared 
for extreme measures. He produced the sacred standard of the 
prophet and called upon all true believers to support him. A 
wholesale massacre of the Janissaries followed, and the name was 
abolished for ever. Mahmoud now set to work to raise a new 
army, which was to consist of 250,000 men armed and trained like 
European troops. But a long time must elapse before such an 


ae 


A.D. 1826-1827. BATTLE OF NAVARINO. 655 


elaborate scheme could be carried out, and meanwhile Turkey was 
defenceless. This compelled the Sultan to accept all the demands 
of Nicolas in the convention of Ackermann (October, 1826). ‘The 
treaty of Bucharest was confirmed, and it was agreed that the 
Hospodars of Moldavia and Wallachia should be chosen for seven 
years, that they should rule with a council of Boyars in complete 
independence of the Porte, and that they could not be deposed 
without the consent of Russia. Servia was to elect its own prince 
and the Sultan was not to interfere in its internal affairs. Russia 
was to occupy the fortresses on the east coast of the Black Sea, 
and Russian ships had the right of cntering all Turkish waters. 

§ 16. One of the Sultan’s motives for such abject compliance was 
a desire to separate Russia from England on the Greek question. 
But Nicolas was the last man to be turned from his course by an 
exhibition of weakness, and the negotiations were actively pro- 
secuted at a conference in London, Metternich: resolutely refused 
to countenance rebellion in any form, and induced Frederick William 
of Prussia to adhere to the programme of the Holy Alliance. In 
France the moderate Louis XVIII. had been succeeded by the 
reactionary Charles X., but the strong French sympathy with the 
Greeks induced the government to disregard the danger of revolu- 
tion and to join Russia and England. On the 6th of July, 1827, 
the three powers concluded the treaty of London, which was based 
on the previous convention of April, 1826. Greece was to be 
tributary but otherwise independent; hostilities were to cease 
immediately ; and if the Sultan failed to accept the mediation of 
the powers within a month, the latter would recognise the entire 
independence of Greece. ‘This treaty, which was forced upon 
Canning by the fear of allowing Russia to interfere single-handed, 
was his last conspicuous act. He died on the 8th of August, and 
the Tories gradually regained the upper hand in the ministry. 

The Sultan, whose hopes of success had been raised by the 
capture of Missolonghi aud Athens, haughtily refused to admit 
the right of any power to interfere between himself and his 
rebellious subjects. Ibrahim at this time received large reinforce- 
ments, which were brought to Navarino by an Egyptian fleet from 
Alexandria. He received orders to wage a war of extermination in the 
Morea, and he acted up to the letter of his instructions. Meanwhile 
the allied fleets of England, France, and Russia had appeared on 
the scene to enforce the treaty of London. . The admirals called 
upon Ibrahim to cease hostilities, and entered the harbour of 
Navarino to compel his submission. In these circumstances a 
battle was inevitable, and in four hours the whole Egyptian fleet 
was utterly destroyed (20 October, 1827). Mehemet Ali was . 


656 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. XXY. 


compelled to recall his son. Such active mediation had not been 
anticipated in England, where the ministers alluded to the battle 
as “an untoward event.” But the Greeks, whose cause seemed 
on the very verge of collapse, received the news with frantic 
enthusiasm. Mahmoud II. complained bitterly of the outrage, 
and expressed his determination not to yield. In December the 
ambassadors of the allied powers had to leave Constantinople. 

§ 17. That the battle of Navarino really proved an ‘‘ untoward 
event” to English interests, was due mainly to the conduct of 
the ministers, who abandoned the policy of Canning and allowed 
Russia to attack Turkey single-handed, the very thing which he 
had striven to avoid. No opposition was made to the election 
of the Russian nominee, Capo d’Istria, as president by the Greek 
national assembly. Nicolas was eager to seize the advantages 
offered to him by the vacillation of England and the destruction of 
the Janissaries. ‘Time was required to collect the resources of so 
vast a country as Russia, but in April, 1828, war was declared, and 
in May 150,000 Russian troops under Wittgenstein crossed the 
Pruth. To the astonishment of Europe: the campaign was a 
complete failure. The Turks wisely restricted their efforts to the 
defence of fortresses, in which they have always excelled. ‘The 
Russians spent so much time in the siege of Schumla, Varna, and 
Silistria, that winter compelled them to retreat before they had 
achieved anything beyond the reduction of Varna. The simulta- 
neous campaign in Asia was more fortunate, and Paskiewitsch, 
who had already made a great name in the wars with Persia, 
captured the strong fortresses of Kars and Achalzik, which the 
Turks regarded as impregnable. At the same time the with- 
drawal of Ibrahim and his Egyptian troops enabled the Greeks once 
more to hold their own in the peninsula. Still, on the whole the 
Russians had failed, and Metternich endeavoured to take advantage 
of this to arrange a peace which should save Turkey from humili- 
ation. But France and Prussia declined to support him, and even 
Wellington, vho was now at the head of the English ministry, 
would not take any active steps to check the advance of Russia. 

In 1829 the command of the Russian army was transferred 
from Wittgenstein to Diebitsch, a native of Silesia. His plan was 
to cover the Turkish fortresses and to push on with his main 
force across the Balkans. A complete victory over the newly- 
appointed Vizier, Redschid Pasha, was-followed by the surrender of 
Silistria (80 June), The passage of the Balkans, a military feat 
which the Russians had never yet attempted, was successfully 
accomplished, and on the 19th of August Diebitsch appeared before 
- Adrianople. But his troops had suffered so much from hunger and 


A.D. 1827-1833. THE KINGDOM OF GREECE. 657 


disease that he was only followed by about 13,000 men, and a 
resolute attack on the part of the Turks must have resulted in his 
utter ruin. Fortunately, his marvellous achievement, and the 
approach of the enemy to so short a distance from his capital, over- 
came the courage of Mahmoud II., and he concluded the treaty of 
Adrianople on the 14th of September. Russia resigned all couquests 
except some islands at the mouth cf the Danube and a stip of 
territory in Asia which included the fortress of Achalzik. ‘These 
acquisitions, though small, were of considerable strategical im- 
portance. The Hospodars of Moldavia and Wallachia were to be 
appointed for life, they were to have independent sovereign power, 
and no Mussulman might reside in these provinces, which became 
practically appendages of Russia. The navigation of the Danube 
was to be free, and the vessels of neutral powers were to be allowed 
to pass through the Dardanelles. ‘The Porte accepted the pro- 
visions of the treaty of London with regard to Greece. 

§ 18. Another conference in London undertook to settle the 
affairs of the new state, and issued a protocol on the subject in 
February, 1830. A tardy and ill-timed regard for Turkish sensi- 
tiveness gave Greece a niggardly frontier, extending from the Gulf 
of Volo on the east to the mouth of the river Aspro on the west. 
The government was to be a constitutional monarchy, and the 
crown was offered to Leopold of Saxe-Coburg, the widower: of 
Princess Charlotte of England. After some hesitation he refused 
it, and during the interregnum Capo d’Istria continued to rule. 
The latter was suspected of aiming at the crown himself, and the 
opposition to him became so vehement that it led to civil war. 
The Greek fleet was burnt by Miaulis to prevent its being used by 
the Russians to support the President. Soon afterwards Capo d’Istria 
was assassinated (Oct. 1831). At last the allied powers agreed to 
extend the frontier on the west from the Aspro to Arta, and 
found an aspirant to the throne in Otho I., a younger son of the 
king of Bavaria. In 1833 he landed at Nauplia, but two years 
elapsed before he really undertook the work of government, and 
fixed upon Athens as his capital. 


Ill. FRANCE UNDER CHARLES X. AND THE REVOLUTION OF 1830. 


§ 19. The reaction in France which commenced with the death 
of the duke of Berry was carried to its height by the ministry 
of Villéle. The expedition to Spain in 1823 was so completely 
successful that a royalist chamber was elected and its existence 
prolonged for seven years. On the 16th of September, 1824, Louis 
XVIII. died. He had never been popular in France, and he was 


658 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. xxv. 


not a strong ruler; but there can be no doubt that he displayed 
creditable wisdom and self-restraint. He disapproved of the re- 
action and foresaw the disasters that it would bring upon his 
successor, but he was too weak to resist the pressure of his 
ministers and his own family. The count of Artois, who now 
became king, was imbued with all the prejudices and prepossessions 
of the old régime, and he had none of his brother’s power of seeing 
when it was necessary to yield. He contrasts with Louis X VIIL. as 
James II, did with Charies II. But his first measures were popular. 
He expressed his determination to uphold the Charter, he removed 
the censorship of the press, and he restored to Louis Philippe, the 
son of Philippe Egalité, the great possessions of the house of 
Orleans and the title of Royal Highness. But before long he 
showed his real intentions. The ministry of Villé’e was retained, 
more tian 150 officers of the Empire were dismissed from the army, 
and the Jesuits, though still proscribed by law, were allowed to 
return to France and to resunie their control of education. The 
enormous sum of 100,000,000 francs was raised to compensate the 
losses of the emigrants; and in spite of vigorous opposition the 
scheme was adopted by the submissive chambers. Put it was the 
king’s devotion to the Church that raised the bitterest discontent. 
The oj en patronage of the Jesuits, the gorgeous processions through 
the streets, in which the king himself took part, and a law which 
proposed to punish sacrilege with death, aroused uncompromising 
hostility in a city where the teaching of Voltaire still prevailed. In 
1825 the funeral of General Foy, the most eloquent leader of the 
opposition, gave an opportunity for a grand liberal demonstration. 
To silence criticism the government brought in a new law to shackle 
the press, but it was received with such disfavour in both chambers 
that it had to be withdrawn. In 1827, while the king was re- 
viewing the national guard, a cry was ra‘sed of “Down with the 
Jesuits!” and the force was broken up. Viiléle now determined on 
a last effort to maintain his power. The chamber of deputies was 
dissolved and seventy-six new peers were created. But the new 
el.ctions went complete y against the government, and the liberals 
secured a majority of 428 to 125. The king was compelled to give 
way, and Villéle was dismissed (Jan. 3, 1828). 

§ 20. A moderate ministry now came into office under the 
presidency of M. de Martignac. A law was introduced which 
imposed only slight restrictions upon the press, and a number of 
ordinances were issued against the Jesuits. But Martignac found 
that he had a very difficult position to occupy. Charles X. re- 
garded the ministers as forced upon him, and refused to give them 
his confidence. At the same time the majority of deputies were 


& 2 


A.D. 1824-1830. FRANCE UNDER CHARLES X. 659 


hostile to them for not carrying liberal measures, which their 
relations to the king made impossible. Martignac wished to 
strengthen the monarchy, and to give stability to the constitution, 
by freeing the provinces from the excessive preponderance of the 
capital, Karly in 1829 he brought forward a proposal to give to 
colleges in the communes and departments some control over the 
authority of the mayors and preects. But this was not well 
received by the liberals, who had matters their own way in Paris, 
and who feared the preponderance of conservative and clerical 
influence in the country. On the 380:h of July, 1829, the king 
dissolved the chambers, and seized the opportunity to dismiss 
Martignac and his colleagues. He had convinced himself that 
concessions only encouraged more extreme demands, and he was 
determined not to yield. At the head of the new ministry was 
Prince Jules de Polignac, the son of Marie Antoinette’s favourite, 
and the representative of the emigrant nobles. ‘The choice was an 
unfortunate one, as Polignac was incapable as well as unpopular, 
but it was dictated to some extent by foreign politics. It was just 
at this time that Russia and Turkey were negotiating at Adrianople, 
and Austria and England were anxious to prevent the former from 
obtaining excessive advantages from its victory. Martignac had 
been altogether on the side of Russia, and one of his chief supporters 
had been Pozzo di Borgo, the Russian envoy at Paris. Polignac 
was a personal friend of Wellington, the head of the Tory ministry 
in England, and this contributed to his elevation. Still more un- 
fortunate was the choice of the minister of war, General Bourmont, 
who had deserted to the allies at the beginning of the battle of 
Waterloo, an act which the French could neither forget nor 
forgive, 

The appointment of the new ministry was greeted with general 
indignation. Lafayette came forward as the leader of the agitation, 
and formed a secret society with the name Aide toi et le ciel t'aidera, 
which exercised considerable influence over the elections. When 
the chambers met in March, 1830, the liberals had an over- 
whelming majority among the deputies. Their leaders were Royer- 
Collard and Guizot, the representatives of the constitutional 
theorists or doctrinaires, and the former was elected president. A 
number of royalist peers, influenced either by jealousy of Polignac 
or by Russian intrigues, deserted the ministry, and an address 
expressing want of confidence was carried by large majorities. 
Charles X. dissolved the chambers again, and determined to make 
a bold bid for popularity by an expedition against the Dey of 
Algiers, who had insulted the French consul. The French have 
always been very eager for military glory, and it was hoped that 


660 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. XXy. 


the news of a brilliant success just at the time of the election 
would secure a majority for the government. But the scheme was 
too obvious not to be seen through, and unforeseen accidents 
postponed the expected triumph until the elections were over 
(4 July). A chamber was returned which was still more hostile to 
the government than its predecessor. Matters had now reached a 
crisis, but Charles X. was resolute to make no concessions. On 
the 25th of July a ministerial conference at St. Cloud drew up the 
celebrated Ordinances, which were issued on the next day. The 

press was subjected to a strict censorship and the chief liberal 
" papers were suppressed. ‘The number of electors was diminished 
by raising the property qualification, and elections were to be no 
longer direct but indirect. ‘he recently chosen chamber was 
dissolved before it had even met, and a new one was summoned for 
the 8th of September. ‘These exceptional measures were justified 
by the 14th article of the Charter—“ The king makes regulations 
and ordinances for the execution of the laws and the safety of the 
state.” 

§ 21. The Ordinances were wholly unexpected in Paris, where the 
first feeling was one of stupefied astonishment. If the government 
had been fully prepared for active measures, an easy triumph was 
assured. But there were only 12,000 troops in the capital, and the 
command was in the hands of Marmont, who was unpopular among 
the soldiers as a traitor to Napoleon, and who personally disap- 
proved of the Ordinances. ‘The first opposition came from the 
journalists, headed by Thiers and Mignet, who refused to recognise 
the suppression of their papers as a legal act. The liberal deputies 
assembled at the house of Casimir Périer, but they distrusted the 
chances of a popular revolt, and contented themselves with a written 
protest against the dissolution of a chamber which had never met. 
Among the citizens there were bolder spirits. The manufactories 
were closed, the workmen crowded the streets, and a number of 
collisions with the troops occurred on the 28th of July. Marmont 
advised concessions, but Charles X., who had gone on a hunting-party 
as if nothing was happening, sent him orders to stand firm. On the 
29th came the decisive conflict. Lafayette, who was absent when 
the Ordinances were issued, hurried back to Paris and assumed the 
command of the national guard. The troops were concentrated to 
defend the Tuileries, the Louvre, and the Palais Royal, and an 
obstinate conflict took place, in which much blocd was shed. At 
last Marmount’s indecision allowed the populace to gain possession of 
the Louvre, from which the long gallery admitted them to the 
Tuileries. So strong was the feeling against disgracing the revolt, 
that the treasures of the palace were left undisturbed, and a man 


D. 1830. THE JULY REVOLUTION. 661 


who was detected in the act of plunder was promptly executed. 
By the evening Paris was in the hands of the mob. 

When the news of these events reached St. Cloud the old king 
was at last compelled to recognise the necessity of concessions. 
Polignac was dismissed, and the duke of Mortemart, a moderate 
man and acceptable to the Russian court, was appointed in his 
place. Mortemart lost no time in sending to Paris and announcing 
the revocation of the Ordinances. But it was too late. The 
deputies had recovered their courage when the victory had been 
won for them, and had entrusted the provisional government to a 
municipal commission, of which Lafayette, Laffite, Casimir Périer 
and Gérard were members. They refused to recognise Mortemart, 
and declared that “the stream of blood which has flowed in 
Charles X.’s name has separated him from France for ever.” The 
respectable bourgeoisie wished to secure themselves against anarchy 
and to form a durable government. The establishment of a 
republic would inevitably excite the enmity of the great powers, 
would lead to another European war, and probably to a third 
restoration. ‘These considerations urged all moderate men_ to 
maintain a monarchical government in France. Fortunately they 
had not far to look for a suitable candidate for the throne. The 
duke of Orleans had been the acknowledged patron of the liberal 
party ever since his return to France in 1815, and the favour shown 
to him by Charles X. had failed to draw him any closer to the 
elder branch of his family. He was a Bourbon and therefore might 
be expected to satisfy the scruples of the monarchical states of 
Europe. At the same time he would owe his power altogether to 
the popular choice, and could hardly venture upon unconstitutional 
government. Laffite and Thiers were his active supporters, and 
found no difficulty in gaining over the majority of the deputies. 
Messengers were sent to Neuilly, where the duke was then resid- 
ing, to ask him to undertake the office of Lieutenant-General of the 
kingdom until the chambers could meet to secure the observance of 
the Charter. Louis Philippe, whose réle was to profess a becoming 
want of ambition, waited to consult Talleyrand, on whose diplo- 
matic experience he relied to conciliate the European courts. On 
receiving his approval, he at once journeyed to Paris and accepted 
the proffered office. At the same time, to secure himself on both 
sides, he sent a letter through Mortemart to assure Charles X. of 
his fidelity. The king placed such confidence in these treacherous 
professions that he confirmed the duke’s appointment, and thus 
helped to drive his own supporters to the side of the usurper. The 
municipal commission, which was suspected of republican: ten- 
dencies, was not informed of the action of the deputies until all 


662 MODERN EUROPE. CHaP. XXY. 


had been settled. Lafayette, however, was soon won over by Louis 
Philippe’s professions, and the name of Orleans was so popular in 
Paris that opposition was out; of the question. 

§ 22. Charles X. was still confident that his crown was secure, 
but the anxiety of the duchess of Berry for the safety of her scn 
induced him to move from St. Cloud to the ‘Trianon and thence to 
Rambouiilet. There he was persuaded that his own unpopularity 
endangered the dynasty, and both he and the Dauphin abdicated in 
favour of the duke of Bordeaux (1 August). ‘The duke of Orleans, 
whose honesty was still relied upon, was asked to assume the 
regency for the infant king. But Louis Philippe now saw the 
crown within his grasp, and was determined to drive his rivals 
from the kingdom. The cry was raised that Charles X. meditated 
an attack upon Paris, and a mob of 60,000 men marched upon 
Rambouillet. At last Charles realised the treachery of his relative 
and gave up all hope. His misfortunes were respected by the 
people as he journeyed to Cherbourg, whence he sailed to England, 
aud for the second time took up his residence at Holyrood. On 
the 8rd August the French chambers were opened, and on the 7th 
they had decided the future of France. The crown was declared 
vacant through the abdication of Charles X. and the Dauphin, and 
no allusion was made to the duke of Bordeaux. By 219 to 33 
votes Louis Philippe was raised to the throne with the title of 
“King of the French.” The Roman Catholic church was no 
longer to be privileged, and all forms of religion were placed on an 
equal footing; the censorship of the press was abolished; the king 
was forbidden to suspend any law, to appoint extraordinary 
tribunals, or to employ foreign troops; indirect election was 
abolished ; deputies were to be chosen for five years ; the sessions of 
the peers were to be public, and the peers nominated by Charles X. 
were struck off the list; the chambers were to have the right of 
initiating laws as well as the king, the tricolour was substituted for 
the white flag. On the 9th of August, Louis Philippe was formally 
enthroned in the Palais Bourbon. He found little difficulty in 
procuring the recognition of the European courts, which were only 
too pleased that the dangers of a republican government in France 
had been avoided. England was the first to approve a change 
which was a flattering imitation of her own institutions, and which 
seemed to ensure a preponderating influence in the neighbouring 
state. The last sovereign to acknowledge Louis Philippe was the 
Czar of Russia. 


A.D. 1830. HOLLAND AND BELGIUM. 663 


1V. LiseraL Movements In Europe. 


§ 23. The contrast between the two Revolutions through which 
France had passed is conspicuously illustrated by the difference in 
their results, and this difference is nowhere more obvious than in 
England. The reaction after the death of Louis XVI. and the 
reign of terror effectually stayed the progress of English liberties. 
Pitt abandoned the reforming projects of his earlier years, the 
government adopted a sternly repressive attitude, the Tories obtained 
almost uninterrupted rule for forty years, and the Whigs became a 
powerless and discredited minority. But the Revolution of 1830 
fascinated, instead of repelling, the English people. Wellington’s 
ministry fell, and the Whigs came into office under Lord Grey. The 
Reform Bill of 1832, the first great step in extending to the masses 
the liberties that had been won in 1688, was carried by the over- 
whelming pressure of public opinion, and the House cf Lords did 
not dare to persist in its opposition. Throughout Europe the 
example of the French exercised a similar influence, and encouraged 
the liberal party to shake off the trammels that had been imposed 
by the Congress of Vienna and the Holy Alliance. ‘The inde- 
pendence of Belgium, the rising in Poland, the advance of consti- 
tutional principles in several of the German states, the movements 
in Italy, Switzerland, and Portugal, were all more or less direct 
results of the July Revolution. 

§ 24. The treaty of Vienna had united Holland and Belgium into 
a single kingdom under William I., who had previously been stadt- 
holder of Holland. In doing this the congress had been actuated 
by purely political motives, and had paid no regard whatever to 
the interests or wishes of the peoples they dealt with. But the 
differences which had divided the Netherlands into two halves in 
the 16th century had by no means been removed by the lapse of 
300 years. The second branch of the House of Orange was not 
likely to succeed where William the Silent and Maurice of Nassau 
had failed. he Dutch were bigoted Calvinists, the Belgians were 
equally devoted to Roman Catholicism; the northern provinces 
were essentially Teutonic, the southern were inclined to the 
civilisation and language of the Romance lands that lay near 
them; Holland was a trading, Belgium a manufacturing country. 
William I., by his obvious preference of his Dutch subjects, had 
intensified rather than removed these natural differences. ‘The 
Dutch, though their numbers were smaller, had an equal number of 
representatives with the Belgians, and the constitution was forced 
upon the latter in spite of their protests. The Belgians were 
saddled with the burden of the national debt of the northern state. 


664 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. xxv. 


The clergy were alienated by the establishment of secular education 
under state control, and by the placing of the Roman Catholic and 
Calvinist churches upon an equal footing. A close alliance was 
formed between the clerical and the liberal parties, and this alliance, 
though as unnatural as the state itself, was none the less formidable. 
Ever since 1828 the opposition had been growing in strength, and 
had been encouraged rather than appeased by the concessions which 
had been extorted from the king. 

Matters were in this state when the news arrived of the Revolu- 
tion in Paris. For three weeks the quiet prevailed that precedes 
the storm. On the 25th of August a performance of the ‘ Mute 
of Portici,” an opera of which the plot centres round the revolt of 
Masaniello, was followed by a rising in Brussels. The residences 
of Van Maanen and other unpopular ministers were sacked, and the 
troops, when they were at last called out, were driven back to their 
barracks. The government practically abdicated its functions and 
made no further efforts to restore order. A national guard was 
formed which speedily made itself master of the capital. A pro- 
visional government of some of the chief citizens opened nego- 
tiations with the king. But the movement had gone too far to be 
contented with concessions which might have been welcomed a 
month before. ‘The example of Brussels was followed by the other 
towns, and in some, e.g. Verviers, the mob was guilty of revolu- 
tionary excesses. William I., though determined to maintain his 
rights, found it necessary to temporise, and sent his eldest son, 
William prince of Orange, to calm the rebels with promises. The 
prince went so far as to suggest the legislative and administrative 
independence of Belgium under the Dutch crown. The king 
showed no hostility to the scheme, but reserved a definite settle- 
ment for the meeting of the States-General, which he summoned at 
the Hague on the 13th of September. 

There would have been no difficulty in carrying through the 
States-General the scheme of a separate legislature and administra- 
tion, as the Dutch were quite as eager for it as the Belgians. But, 
the king was really determined not to give way, and the Dutch 
deputies did not like to thwart him. The matter was not even 
discussed, and William I. went so far as to recal Van Maanen, whom 
he had previously dismissed. The Belgians felt that they had been 
duped, and the rebellion was carried on with new vigour. This 
time the Liégeois took the lead. Marching to Brussels, they estab- 
lished a new and more democratic provisional government. Prince 
Frederick, the king’s second son, who had been collecting troops 
while his elder brother was negotiating, attacked Brussels but was 
repulsed. The Belgian soldiers espoused the national cause, and the 


A.D. 1830-1831. BELGIAN INDEPENDENCE, 665 


Dutch troops were expelled from most of the fortresses. Antwerp, 
Maestricht, and the citadel of Ghent alone remained in their hands, 
The States-General, alarmed at the course of events, now hastened to 
decree the lezislative and administrative separation, but it was too 
late. On the 5th of October the provisional government proclaimed 
the independence of Belgium, appointed a commission to draw up a 
constitution, and summoned a national congress to meet at Brussels. 
Four days later they declared that the House of Orange had forfeited 
all claims upon Belgium. If they had had their own way, they 
would probably have established a republic. But the clerical party, 
hitherto thrown into the background by its liberal allies, showed its 
strength in the elections to the national congress, and secured the 
return of a moderate majority. 

§ 25. The Belgian question excited the keenest interest in 
Europe, and there was a fear lest it might revive a general war. 
The liberal party was known to desire the re-union of Belgium with 
France, and this would have been a signal for general hostilities. But 
Louis Philippe hastened to purchase the recognition of the great 
powers by promising not to accept the Belgian crown or to allow the 
erection of a republic. Nicolas of Russia was inclined to support 
William I., who had appealed for the aid of the five powers, but his 
hands were full with the contemporary Polish revolution. The 
Tory ministry in England, which might have backed up the Czar, 
was hampered by the growing power of the Liberals, and moreover, 
the interests of English commerce and manufactures demanded the 
separation of Holland and Belgium. Prussia was afraid lest the 
revolutionary movement might extend to its Rhine provinces, and 
Austria was anxious about Poland and Italy. The result was, that 
the principles of the Holy Alliance were abandoned, and the great 
powers adopted, for the first time, the policy of non-intervention. 
A conference of ministers, of which Talleyrand was the guiding 
spirit, met in London, and its first protocol (4 Noy.) called upon 
Holland and Belgium to accept an armistice, which was done. 

The national congress met at Brussels on the 10th of November, 
and determined to act as much as possible in accord with the 
London conference. It was decreed that Belgium should be an 
independent state, the delicate question of Luxemburg being re- 
served; that the government should be a monarchy; that. the 
house of Orange should be excluded from the throne; and that the 
legislature should consist of two chambers. These decrees, and 
especially the abandonment of republican. designs, were acceptable 
to the powers, and on the 20th of December the London conference 
accepted the principle of Belgian independence. Karly in 1881 the 
‘ bases de séparation’ were drawn up, which preserved to Holland 
. 30 


666 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP, xxv. 


the boundaries of 1790 with Luxemburg, and imposed upon Belgium 
one half of the Dutch debt. These terms were accepted by 
William I., but were protested against by the Belgian congress. 
The Belgians refused to give up their hold upon Luxemburg, and 
the Dutch retained Antwerp. 

The congress now proceeded to draw up a new constitution and 
to elect a king. Their choice fell upon the duke of Nemours, the 
second son of Louis Philippe. But the French connection was dis- 
tasteful to the other powers, and Louis Philippe was compelled by 
prudence to decline the offer. On the 4th of June the Belgians 
chose Leopold of Saxe Coburg, the widower of the English Princess 
Charlotte. The London conference now issued a new protocol 
(27 June) containing 18 articles, which gave Belgium more favour- 
able boundaries, left Luxemburg in statu quo, and made the country 
responsible only for its own debt and fora share of that which had 
been jointly contracted. These terms having been approved by 
the congress, Leopold accepted the crown, proceeded to Belgium, 
and swore to accept the constitution. William I. protested bitterly 
against the 18 articles, and on this ground the representatives of 
Russia, Austria and Prussia postponed their recognition of Leopold. 

While Leopold was engaged in a tour through his new kingdom, 
he was disagreeably surprised by the news that a Dutch army 
had crossed the frontier. ‘The Belgians, trusting in the support of 
Europe, were wholly unprepared for war, and their troops were routed 
in every engagement. On August 11th Leopold himself was com- 
pletely defeated at Tirlemont and escaped with difficulty to Mechlin. 
But on the first news of hostilities a French army under Marshal 
Gérard marched into Belgium, while an English fleet appeared in 
the Scheldt. The Dutch were compelled to retire and to conclude 
an armistice. But their energetic action had the desired result of 
obtaining more favourable terms from the powers. On October 14th 
the London conference issued 24 articles, by which Limburg on the 
right of the Meuse was ceded to Holland and Walloon Luxemburg 
to Belgium, and the latter country was to pay 8,400,000 florins a 
year towards the debt. With great reluctance the Belgians accepted 
these altered conditions, and on November 15th all the powers except 
Russia recognised the kingdom of Belgium.’ But William L, 
obstinately trusting to the friendship of the Czar, would have nothing 
to do with the 24 articles. Even when Nicolas, in May, 1832, at last 
accepted the protocol of November 15, the Dutch king refused to give 
way. It was necessary to employ force; an English fleet blockaded 
the coast of Holland, and Marshal Gérard laid siege to Antwerp. 
After an heroic defence, General Chassé, the commander of the gar- 
rison, was compelled to capitulate on December 28rd. On May 21, 


— 


A.D. 1830-1833. -RISING IN POLAND. 667 


1833, a preliminary treaty was arranged which put an end to hos- 
tilities. But it was not till January 22, 1839, that William I. 
finally consented to accept the 24 articles in a definitive treaty. 
Meanwhile Leopold had married in 1832 the eldest daughter of 
Louis Philippe, and had utilised the period of peace to establish an 
orderly constitutional government in Belgium, under which the 
moral and material welfare of the kingdom made rapid progress. 

§ 26. The kingdom of Poland, which the congress of Vienna had 
called into being, and to which Alexander I. had presented a con- 
stitution on the model of the French Charter, was as artificial a 
creation as the kingdom of the Netherlands. Ruled by a Russian 
viceroy, it could hardly be termed a kingdom, and it comprised only 
a small part of the old Poland. The constitution was utterly un- 
suited to a country which possessed no middle class to mediate 
between the crowd of nobles and serfs. Moreover, constitutional 
checks were inconsistent with the habits and traditions of Russian 
despotism. ‘lhe grand-duke Constantine, who had preferred his 
government at Warsaw to the throne of the Czars, had already 
broken through the letter of the constitution, and several conspira- 
cies had been detected and punished, when the French Revolution 
gave a new impulse to the undying love of national independence. 
In the dusk of the evening of November 29, 1830, a number of 
young men attacked the residence of the viceroy. Several officers 
were killed, but Constantine himself escaped to join the Russian 
troops. The citizens of Warsaw rose at the signal, and the Polish 
soldiers came over to their side. Constantine made no effort 
to put down the rebellion, and was allowed to depart from the 
province without molestation. 

The first step in the revolution had been successful, and Poland 
was free. But from this moment the want of unanimity, which was 
ultimately fatal to the movement, began to showitself. Chlopicki, 
who had won renown in the Napoleonic wars, assumed the command 
of the army, but he was out of sympathy with the people, and eager 
to make terms with the Czar. At the head of the provisional 
government was Adam Czartoriski, a descendant of the great house 
of Jagellon, but wanting in decision and ability. In the diet which 
met on the 18th of December, parties were hopelessly divided. The 
extreme revolutionists wished to push on as rapidly as possible, and 
to kindle the flames of insurrection in ail the provinces that had 
once belonged to Poland. But the moderate party was afraid of 
alienating Austria and Prussia, and hoped, by laying stress on the 
breaches of the constitution, to secure the support of the western 
powers. Theresult was that the rebellion remained stationary, and 
envoys were sent to make terms with Nicolas. The Czar refused 


668 MODERN EUROPE. . _. CHap. xxv. 


all concessions, demanded immediate submission, and ordered Die- 
bitsch to advance with an army into Poland. On receipt of this 
answer, Chlopicki resigned his command, and was succeeded by the 
honest but incapable Radziwill. The diet now proceeded to decree 
the deposition of Nicolas, but, to gratify the western powers, 
announced that Poland should remain a constitutional monarchy, 
All hopes of foreign intervention, however, proved futile. Louis 
Philippe took advantage of the Polish difficulty to extort his 
recognition from the Czar, and the other states thought only of 
excluding Russian influence in the settlement of the Belgian 
question. 

In February, 1831, Diebitsch, with 114,000 men, crossed the fron- 
tier and marched against Praga, the bulwark of Warsaw on the side 
of the Vistula. Now followed a heroic struggle which casts a ray 
of glory upon the last days of Poland. In one battle after another 
the Russians were foiled by the resolute courage of their opponents. 
The cholera broke out among the besiegers, and carried off Diebitsch 
on the 10th of June, and the grand-duke Constantine a month 
later. Paskiewitsch, who now assumed the command, determined 
to cross the Vistula lower down, and to take Warsaw in the rear. 
His plans were aided by the bitterness of party quarrels among 
the Poles. The democrats had alienated the nobles by proposing 
the emancipation. of the serfs. The generals who had defeated 
Diebitsch were accused of treachery. Moderate men were still led 
away by the futile hope of French intervention. A rising in 
Lithuania, which might yet have turned the current of success, 
was allowed to fail for want of support. Finally, the democratic 
party gained the upper hand in Warsaw, expelled Ozartoriski and 
the existing government, put to death all. who were suspected 
of treachery, and gave dictatorial power to its own. leader, 
Krukowiecki. While these events were going on, the enemy were 
at the gates, and resistance became impossible. On September 8th 
Warsaw capitulated to Paskiewitsch, and on the 28th General 
Riidiger entered Krakau. The remnants of the heroic defenders of 
Warsaw escaped to Prussian territory, where they were disarmed 
and dispersed as exiles to France and other parts of Europe. 
Poland was deprived of its constitution, and became a Russian 
province with Paskiewitsch as governor... An amnesty was 
promised by Nicolas, but the exceptions were so numerous that it 
might as well have been withheld. | It was computed that in 1832 
80,000 Poles were sent to Siberia. The keenest sympathy was 
excited in Europe by the:fate of a country which had fought so 
bravely for a liberty which it did not deserve. 

§ 27. The great evil in Germany at this period was the want of 


A.D. 1831-1833. REACTION IN GERMANY. 669 


unity. Material prosperity was obstructed, not only by the closing 
of the mouths of the, Rhine.and Danube, but also by the strict 
customs regulations of the numerous petty states. An attempt had 
been made to remedy this evil by the arrangement of a Zollverein, 
or customs union. ‘This was concluded first between Bavaria and 
Wurtemberg, and in 1829 was joined by Prussia and the northern 
states.. The Revolution of 1830 exercised a marked influence in 
Germany, but unfortunately it hindered rather than promoted 
union. A number of isolated movements broke out to demand 
constitutional privileges for individual states. It is impossible to 
trace in detail the petty revolutions by which concessions were 
extorted from the rulers of Brunswick, Hanover, Saxony, Hesse, 
etc. In Austria and Prussia no disturbances took place, although 
a distinct impulse was given to national independence in Hungary. 
Metternich, however, was alarmed by the prospect of danger to his 
principles of government, and the machinery of the Confederation 
Was once more put in working to repress the progress of reform. 
In 18382 the diet confirmed the Carlsbad decrees, forbade all 
popular assemblies and festivals, and promised military assistance 
to any government that was threatened by revolution. The foolish 
attempt of a few enthusiasts to attack the diet at Frankfort (April, 
1833) gave a great impulse to the reaction. Russia now sought to 
exercise that influence in Germany which the treaty of Vienna 
had given her. In September, 1833, the Czar met the emperor of 
Austria anl the crown-prince of Prussia at Miinchengratz in 
Bohemia. The eastern powers formed a natural league to resist 
the liberal tendencies of England and France. ‘The result of this 
meeting was the holding of a ministerial conference at Vienna 
under the presidency of Metternich. Here it was decided that the 
sovereign of each state in the Confederation should defend his 
rights against the encroachments of the chambers, that military 
force should be employed when necessary, that a judicial court 
should be created to decide all disputes between rulers and 
their subjects, and that the universities and the press should 
be carefully watched. By these means liberal tendencies were 
repressed, and the cultivated classes of Germany, excluded from 
politics, consoled themselves with an almost unique devotion to 
literature. ; 

§ 28. The desire of the congress of Vienna to provide strong 
bulwarks against France had brought about a great increase in the 
territory of Switzerland. Geneva, Wallis (Valais), Tessin (Ticino), 
Neuenburg (Neufchitel), and the Grisons (Graubiinden), had 
all been added to the confederation. But for this accession 
of strength the Swiss had to pay by the restoration in many 


670 MODERN EUROPE. CHaP. XXv. 


of the cantons of the aristocratic government that had. been 
swept away by the French conquest. As time went on a strong 
democratic party was formed in Switzerland, which aimed at the 
destruction of these revived class privileges. Already, in April, 
1830, the oligarchy in Tessin had been overthrown, and the news of 
the July Revolution gave a fresh impulse to the liberal movement. 
Zurich, the most powerful canton after Berne, took the lead in the 
work of reform. In November, 1830, a new constitution was 
introduced, by which the country districts were to elect two-thirds 
of the grand council, while the town only elected one-third. This 
example was followed by nearly all the other cantons, and even the 
powerful aristocracy of Berne had to resign its privileges. In Basel 
an obstinate conflict took place between the citizens and the country 
residents, which was at last settled by the ‘division of the canton 
into two, Stadt Basel and Landschaft Basel. In Neufchatel 
special difficulties arose because it was subject to the king of 
Prussia as well as a Swiss canton; but the monarchical party 
ultimately succeeded in retaining the upper hand. The liberal 
cantons now endeavoured to complete their work by reforming the 
constitution of the confederation. In March, 1832, a league was 
formed, known as the Siebener-Concordat, between Berne, Zurich, 
Lucerne, Solothurn, St. Gallen, Thurgau, and Aargau. They under- 
took to support each other’s liberties with arms, and to remain 
united until the constitution had been revised. To resist this a 
counter league, the Sarner Bund, was formed by the five conser- 
vative and Roman Catholic cantons, Uri, Schwyz, Unterwalden, 
Wallis, and Nenfchatel, and they were speedily joined by Stadt 
Basel. The conservative party was indiscreet enough to act on the 
aggressive, and the Schwyzers attacked Landschaft Basel. The 
attack was repulsed, and the confederate assembly responded by 
dissolving the Sarner Bund (August, 1834) and by recognising the 
division of Basel into two cantons, against which the conservatives 
had protested. Thus the liberals gained a decisive victory, which 
they celebrated by founding the university of Zurich. 

§ 29. Italy was declared by Metternich to be “of all European 
countries, the one which had the greatest tendency to revolution.” 
The secret association of the Carbonari aimed at the complete 
overthrow of political and social relations. The more moderate 
liberals would have been content to free the peninsula from the 
despotic influence of Austria and to establish constitutional checks 
upon the existing governments. The Revolution of 1830 made a 
natural impression in a country which had many evils to complain 
of and which had so lately been connected with France. The duke 
of Modena, Francis IV., sought to make use of the liberal move- 


A.D. 1830-1834. REACTION IN ITALY. 671 


ment to extend his rule over northern Italy. But at the last 
moment he was terrified by threats from Vienna, turned against 
his fellow-conspirators, and imprisoned them (Feb. 3, 1831). The 
people, however, were so alienated by his treachery, that he fled 
with his prisoners to seek safety in Austrian territory. <A provi- 
sional government was formed, and Modena was declared a free 
state. Meanwhile the election of a new pope, Gregory XVI., gave 
occasion for a rising in the papal states. Bologna took the lead in 
throwing off its allegiance to Rome, and in a few weeks its example 
was followed by the whole of Romagna, Umbria, and the Marches. 
The two sons of Louis Bonaparte, the late king of Holland, hastened 
to join the insurgents, but the elder died at Forli (17 March), and 
thus an eventful career was opened to the younger brother, the 
future Napoleon III. Parma revolted against Maria Louisa, who 
followed the example of the duke of Modena and fled to Austria. 
The success of the movement, however, was very short-lived. 
Austrian troops marched to the assistance of the papacy, the 
rebellion was put down by force, and the exiled rulers were 
restored. Louis Philippe, on whom the insurgents had relied, 
had no sympathy with a movement in which members of the 
Bonaparte family were engaged. But a temporary revival of the 
insurrection brought the Austrians back to Romagna, and a great 
outcry was raised in France against the king. ‘To satisfy public 
opinion, Louis Philippe sent a French force to seize Ancona 
(Feb. 22, 1832), but it was a very harmless demonstration, and had 
been explained beforehand to the papal government. In Naples 
and Sardinia no disturbances took place. Ferdinand II. succeeded 
his father, Francis I., on the Neapolitan throne in 1830, and satisfied 
the people by introducing a more moderate system of government. 
Charles Albert became king of Sardinia on the death of Charles 
Felix (27 April, 1831), and found himself in a difficult position 
between Austria, which had good reason to mistrust him, and the 
liberal party, which he had betrayed. 

§ 30. The only cther country in which the July Revolution 
produced a definite result was Portugal. In 1826 the death of 
John VI. had given rise to a dispute about the succession. His 
eldest son, Pedro I., was Emperor of Brazil, and excluded by the 
Brazilian constitution from succeeding in Portugal. He therefore 
transferred his rights to his daughter, Maria da Gloria, but she 
was opposed by her uncle Dom Miguel, who claimed as the nearest 
male heir. The arrival of English troops in Lisbon secured the 
accession of Donna Maria, who granted a constitution which had 
been drawn up by her father. But Pedro, in the hope of satisfying 
his ambitious brother, negotiated a compromise by which Dom 


672 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. xxv. 


Miguel became regent in 1828, after taking an oath to observe the 
constitution. The English troops were now recalled by Welling- 
ton, and the regent seized the opportunity to break his engagement. 
He usurped the crown, annulled the constitution, imprisoned all 
opponents whom he could seize, and gave way to the most insane 
excesses of arbitrary power. Donna Maria, who was on her way 
from Brazil to her kingdom, only got as far as England, where she 
was received with royal honours. But the Tory ministry refused 
to support her cause, and she soon returned to Brazil. In 1830 the 
news of the French Revolution gave rise to disturbances in Rio 
Janeiro, and early in the next year Pedro was compelled to abdi- 
cate in favour of his son Pedro II. He now determined to espouse 
the cause of his daughter, sailed to Terceira, and landed in Oporto 
in 1832. The Whigs were now in power in England, and nume- 
rous volunteers left this country to support the constitutional cause 
in Portugal. For a year the usurper held his own against attack. 
But a naval victory won by Napier, who commanded Pedro’s fleet, 
led to the conquest of Lisbon in 1833, and Donna Maria was 
crowned queen. Dom Miguel, however, still held out in the 
provinces, and European intervention was called in. In 1834 the 
western powers, France, England, Spain and Portugal, concluded 
a Quadruple Alliance, which was Lord Palmerston’s answer to the 
conference of Munchengriitz. This was fatal to Miguel’s cause, 
and he agreed by the treaty of Evoramente (May, 1834) to quit 
the peninsula. Later in the year Pedro I. died, and his daughter, 
now secure upon the throne, was married to the duke of Leuchten- 
berg. As the bridegroom died within two months of the wedding, 
a second husband was found for her in Ferdinand of Coburg. 


V. Tne Retan or Louis PHILIPPE. 


§ 31. The accession of Louis Philippe gave political supremacy in 
France to the middle classes, who had not made the Revolution but 
had prevented it from going too far. The king himself loved to pose 
as a simple citizen, his private life was untainted by profligacy or 
crime; his chief personal fault was avarice, and he hoped by 
abandoning the forms of the old court to disguise his real hankering 
after personal rule. He was surrounded by a group of able men 
who had studied the English constitution, and thought that its 
introduction would prove a panacea for all the evils of France. But 
the constitution which they reverenced was that of the 18th 
century. Guizot, the most eminent of these doctrinaire statesmen, 
wished to play the part of a French Walpole. His sympathies 
were really reactionary ; he would have “‘ everything for the people, 


A.D. 1831. FRANCE UNDER LOUIS PHILIPPE. 673 


nothing by the pecple.” The chief constitutional changes were the 
abolition of hereditary peerage (Sept. 1831) and the lowering of the 
electoral qualification from 800 to 200 franes of direct taxes (March, 
1831). The great mass of Frenchmen remained excluded from 
political privileges. The eminent writer on philosophy, M. Cousin, 
when solicited for his vote, replied with scorn: “ Monsieur, je sais 
professeur ala Faculté des Lettres, je suis membre de l Académie 
des Sciences Morales et Politiques, je suis membre de Académie 
Francaise, je suis membre du Conseil Royal de l’Instruction 
Publique, je suis pair de France, j’ai été ministre, je puis le 
vedevenir, mais je ne suis pas électeur.” This restricted franchise 
irritated the French love of equality, the most permanent 
passion that had been created by the great Revolution, and it 
ensured the ultimate fall of the Orleanist monarchy, It led 
naturally, in France as in England, to a system of management and 
corruption, Men of undoubted personal probity, like M. Guizot, 
did not hesitate to stain their hands with the purchase of votes. 

The chief danger to the new monarchy was the discontent of the 
excluded classes. ‘The peasant proprietors, the most conservative 
element of the French population, were alienated from a government 
which refused to trust them, and though they were not likely to 
risk their property in a new Revolution, they would do nothing to 
avert it. But the industrial classes in the large towns had none of 
the orderly instincts and interests of the peasants. 'lhey were not 
slow to discover that the mere change of masters brought them no 
advantages. ‘The taxes were increased rather than lowered. France 
was at this time passing through the industrial revolution caused 
by the introduction of machinery. A change which had caused so 
much crime and misery in England, was not likely to pass without 
disorder in France. Louis Philippe’s reign is the history of a long 
conflict between capital and labour, in which all the interests of the 
governing classes were on the side of the former. Hence arose those 
socialist theories, which were formulated into systems by St. Simon 
and Fourier, but which were even more dangerous when they were 
entertained by ignorant enthusiasts. ‘The rise of socialism to be a 
political force is one of the most notable facts of this period. 

To these internal difficulties was added the discontent caused by 
foreign politics. Louis Philippe was compelled to purchase the 
recognition of the European powers by sacrifices which hurt the 
amour propre of Frenchmen who remembered the glories of the 
Empire. He allowed the English candidate to obtain the crown 
of Belgium, he offered no serious opposition to Austrian interven- 
tion in Italy, and, worst of all, he lured the Poles to their fate 
by holding out hopes of assistance which were never intended to 

30* 


674 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. Xxv. 


be realised. The occupation of Ancona, an expedition against Dom 
Miguel, and the conquest of Algiers, were but a poor compen- 
sation for the fall of Warsaw. It was round foreign politics that 
party and personal rivalries were chiefly concentrated. The 
king strove hard to maintain the popularity that was essential for 
his position, but he failed. His reign of eighteen years sufficed to 
convince the French that the Orleanist monarchy was not, as they 
had been assured in 1830, “the best of republics.” 

§ 32. Louis Philippe’s first ministry was composed of the men 
who had taken a prominent part in the “days of July.” The due 
de Broglie was president, and among his colleagues were Dupont de 
Kure, Laffitte, Gérard, Molé, Guizot, Sébastiani, and Casimir Périer. 
Outside the ministry the most powerful man was Lafayette, now 
the idol of Paris, who had resumed his old post as commander of 
the national guard. The first difficulty which the government had 
to confront was the trial of the Polignac ministry. The Paris 
mob clamoured for their death, and threatened a rising if their 
thirst for blood was not satisfied. A dispute arose between the 
conservative and republican elements in the cabinet, and victory was 
secured to the latter by the support of Lafayette, whose services the 
king could not yet afford to dispense with. Broglie, Guizot, Molé, 
and Casimir Périer resigned their portfolios, and Laffitte became 
president (Nov. 1830). In December Charles X.’s ministers were 
condemned by the Chamber of Peers to imprisonment for life. 
Disorder in the capital was put down by the national guard, and 
Lafayette, who had thus lost his popularity, was soon afterwards 
dismissed by. the king, who seized the first opportunity to rid 
himself of so formidable a rival. Dupont de [’Eure now resigned, 
and in March, 1831, Laffitte was superseded by Casimir Périer. 

Louis Philippe had now definitely severed himself from the 
republican party, and had thus succeeded in conciliating the legiti- 
mist states of Europe. But his reactionary policy was by no means 
welcome to the French lower classes. Formidable insurrections 
broke out in Lyons and Grenoble, and military force had to be 
employed under the direction of Marshal Soult, who had been 
appointed minister of war. In 1882 the cholera appeared in France, 
aud among its numerous victims was Casimir Périer (16 March), 
in whom the Orleanist monarchy lost one of its firmest supports. His 
place was taken by Montalivet, whom the dying minister had 
recommended to the king. In May the despairing legitimists at- 
tempted a rising in La Vendée, where the duchess of Berry appeared 
in person to encourage the supporters of the house of Bourbon. But 
the movement was easily suppressed, and the duchess was compelled 
to escape in disguise. No sooner was this danger at an end than 


a 


——-- 


A.D. 1830-1833. REIGN OF LOUIS PHILIPPE. 675 


the government had to confront a far more formidable rising in the 
capital. The fuveral of General Lamarque (5 June) was the signal 
for a republican demonstration which speedily developed into open 
rebellion. Barricades were raised, the troops were repulsed, and 
for a moment it seemed likely that the monarchy would be again 
overthrown. But the court sbowed a firm front, and the prompt 
measures of Marshal Soult soon triumphed over the disorderly mob, 
which had no leaders and no definite aims. This double victory in 
La Vendée and in Paris, to which must be added the death of Na- 
poleon’s only son, the duke of Reichstadt (22 July, 1832), gave 
great additional strength to the throne of Louis Philippe. But it 
was felt necessary to make fresh ministerial changes. Soult became 
president of the council, and the doctrinaire leaders, Broglie and 
Guizot, received the portfolios of foreign affairs and public instruc- 
tion. With them came into office a man who was destined to play 
a notable part in French history—M. Thiers. Born at Marseilles in 
1797, educated for the legal profession at Aix, Adolphe Thiers had 
come to Paris in 1821 and had speedily made a great reputation as 
a journalist. Short and ungraceful in figure, excessively near- 
sighted, with awkward gestures and an unpleasing voice, he rose to 
eminence by sheer intellect and energy. He had taken a prominent 
part in the events of 1830, he had been the first to offer the crown 
to the duke of Orleans, and he now reaped his reward in becoming 
a minister of France at the age of 35. 

The new ministry was encouraged by an unexpected success. The 
duchess of Berry, who had hitherto escaped capture by a series of 
romantic escapes, was betrayed by a Jew named Deutz (Nov. 6), 
and imprisoned at Blaye. ‘Io the delight of the government she 
was found to be pregnant, and a declaration was extorted from her 
that she had contracted a secret marriage in Italy. In May, 1833, 
she gave birth to a son, and announced that the father was Count 
Lucchese-Palli, a gentleman of the bed-chamber at the court of 
Naples. This affair, which produced a tremendous sensation at the 
time, humiliated and discouraged the legitimists, while it contri- 
buted to the strength, if not to the credit, of the government. 

The ministers had a secure majority in the chambers, and they 
took advantage of this to obtain large grants of money, which were 
employed in building the Arc de ’ Etoile, in completing the Made- 
leine, and in commencing the vast chain of fortifications round 
Paris. At the same time the famous corps of the Zowaves and the 
Chasseurs @ Afrique were formed to protect and extend the French 
colony in Algeria, which was constantly threatened by the neigh- 
bouring tribes. ‘The heavy taxation necessary to meet this enormous 
expenditure caused great discontent among the. republicans, who 


676 . MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. xxv: 


organised themselves in formidable secret societies. In 1834 a 
second insurrection broke out in Juyons, and was not put down 
without considerable bloodshed. In the next year Fieschi, a native 
of Corsica, attempted to assassinate the king with an “ infernal 
machine.” Louis Philippe escaped uninjured, but his son and forty 
other persons were wounded, while Marshal Mortier and thirteen 
others were killed on the spot. ‘To suppress: its unprincipled 
assailants the government carried through the chambers the severe 
“laws of September” (1835), which were intended to expedite 
judicial processes in political trials and to gag the press. 

§ 33. The government was now stronger than ever, but internal 
dissensions became more conspicuous as external dangers were 
overcome. Tor a long time the rivalry between Guizot and Thiers 
had been growing more bitter, and it became impossible for them 
to act together. arly in 1836 the ministry, which was now headed 
by the duc de Broglie, was defeated on the budget, and the 
opportunity was taken to reorganise it. Guizot and the doctri- 
naires retired, and Thiers became president of the Council and 
minister of foreign affairs. Political parties in France were at this 
time pretty definitely organised in four great divisions: the right, 
small in numbers, but headed by a famous orator, M. Berryer ; the 
right centre, consisting of the doctrinaires under Guizot; the left 
centre, of which Thiers was the mouthpiece ; and the extreme left, 
headed by Odilon Barrot. The three last parties were so evenly 
balanced that domestic legislation was almost impossible, and the 
attention of the government was wholly concentrated upon foreign 
affairs. In these Thiers recognised no principle except the interests _ 
of France. A second attempt to assassinate the king called 
attention to Switzerland, where the political refugees of all nations 
found a refuge from which they could plot in safety against existing 
governments. Backed up by Metternich, Thiers demanded the 
expulsion of the refugees, and the threat of a blockade compelld 
the Swiss to give way. ‘This arbitrary measure gave great umbrage 
to the liberals, and to regain their confidence Thiers proposed 
armed. intervention on behalf of the constitutional party in Spain. 
But this brought him into collision with the king, whose love of 
peace had become a positive passion, and after an existence of 
barely six months his ministry came to an end (Sept., 1836). 
M. Molé now became premier, and the leaders of the doctrinaire 
party again came into office, though without the duc de Broglie. 

§ 34. The death of Charles X. (6 Cct., 1836) gave occasion for 
an act of clemency. ‘The imprisoned ministers were set at liberty, 
though Polignac was Lanished from France for twenty years. A 
few weeks. afterwards Louis Napoleon made a futile attempt to 


A.D. 1834-1840. MINISTERIAL CHANGES. 677 


bring about a rising among the troops at Strasburg. No punish- 
ment was inflicted upon the prince, who was shipped off to America 
and soon returned to Switzerland. His subordinates were acquitted. 
Early in 1837 a proposal was made to settle a fixed revenue for 
three of the king’s children, the dukes of Orleans and Nemours and 
the queen of the Belgians. -This was quite in accordance with the 
usages of constitutional monarchy, but the king’s avarice was so 
unpopular that the chambers refused to accept the proposal. <A 
new ministry was now formed (15 April), of which Molé remained 
the president. ‘The settlement on the duke of Orleans and the 
queen of the Belgians was carried through the chambers, but the 
proposal with regard to the duke of Nemours was dropped. The 
ministry, which had been intended as one of conciliation, found 
itself confronted in 1838 by the formidable opposition of all the 
disappointed aspirants to office. A coalition was formed between 
the Icft, the left centre, and the right centre, and though much 
disgust was caused by the unprincipled sacrifice of conviction, it 
was strong enough to overthrow the ministry in the elections of 
1839. But quarrels broke out among the victors about the division 
of offices, and before they were settled affairs were completely 
altered by the outbreak of a socialist rising. This was organised 
by a secret society called les Saisons, headed by Bernard, Barbés, 
and other professional agitators. ‘lhe Hétel ce Ville was seized, 
and barricades were erected in the streets. Military force soon put 
down the revolt, and the king seized the opportunity to form a 
ministry under Soult from which the leaders of the coalition were 
excluded (12 May). But this arrangement could hardly be lasting. 
In February, 1840, the chambers again refused to grant a settlement 
for ‘the duke of Nemours, and the ministry retired. After an 
interval of intrigue Thiers became premier for the second time 
(1 March), and Guizot was appointed ambassador to London. In 
order to give a striking proof of the alliance with Enzland and of 
the termination of internal quarrels, Thiers determined on an act of 
homage to the great emperor, whose memory his own books had 
done so much to exalt. lt was arranged that the body of Napoleon 
should be brought from St. Helena to be re-interred with pompous 
ceremonies in Paris. But events speedily occurred to rob this 
demonstration of its intended significance. England and France 
had been for some time estranged from each other about eastern 
affairs. France, remembering the part it had once played in Egypt, 
was eager to support Mehemet Ali, who was now at open war with 
the Porte, from which he had conquered Syria. England, on the 
other hand, was by no means willing to allow its old rival to regain 
a secure footing in- the cast. -In-1840 (15 July) England, Russia, 


678 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP, XXVv 


Austria and Prussia concluded the treaty of London, by which they 
agreed to compel Mehemet Ali to withdraw from Syria. This 
treaty made such a profound impression in France that preparations 
were at once made for war, and the work of fortifying Paris was 
resumed with great energy. In the midst of this excitement a new 
proof was given of the irreconcileable hostility of the imperialists. 
On the 6th August Louis Napoleon landed at Boulogne and again 
tried to excite an insurrection. He was captured for the second 
time, and condemned to perpetual imprisonment at Ham, whence 
he escaped in 1846 to England. In October another of the nume- 
rous attempts to assassinate Louis Philippe, by a man named 
Darmés, led to the retirement of Thiers. A new ministry was 
formed (29 Oct.), nominally headed by Soult, but really under the 
guidance of Guizot, who undertook the control of foreign affairs. 

§ 35. This ministry remained in office for the rest of the reign, 
but, though it lasted so much longer, it was not more fortunate 
than its transitory predecessors. Its only success was in Algeria, 
where the French had for many years carried on a desultory war 
with the heroic Arab chieftain, Abd-el-Kader. In 1844 the 
emperor of Morocco was drawn into the war and a great expedition 
was sent out under Marshal Bugeaud. ‘The town of Mogador was 
taken by storm and the emperor compelled to make peace. Finally, 
in 1847, Abd-el-Kader surrendered on condition that he should be 
sent to Egypt. But the condition was disregarded by his 
treacherous conquervrs, and he was thrown into a French prison 
from which he was not released till 1853. Meanwhile affairs in 
Europe were more unpropitious. The dynasty suffered a severe 
blow in 1842 from the death of the duke of Orleans (13 July), who 
left two infant sons, the comte de Paris and the duc de Chartres. 
An injudicious law assigned the regency during the expected 
minority, not to the widowed mother, Helena of Mecklenburg- 
Schwerin, but to the unpopular duc de Nemours. The avowed 
policy of the ministry was one of peace, and especially of alliance 
with England. ‘l’o maintain this alliance, France accepted the pro- 
visions of the treaty of London with regard to Mehemet Ali, and 
in 1848, when a dispute arose about the arrest of Pritchard, am 
English consul, by a French captain in Tahiti, the ministers agreed 
to pay a pecuniary compensation. ‘These measures may have been 
prudent, or even necessary, but they certaiuly irritated public 
opinion in France, always extremely sensitive to the least appearance 
of dictation by a foreign power. At the same time discontent was 
felt at the obstinate hostility of the ministers to all projects of reform, 
and especially to any change in the electoral system. The rule of 
the bourgeoisie was becoming more and more distasteful to the lower 


A.D. 18238-1843. SPAIN. 679 


classes, but Guizet declined to entrust political privileges to men 
who had not been trained to their exercise. While domestic affairs 
were so threatening, the English alliance, for which such sacrifices 
had been made, received a severe shock from the conduct of the 
French government. in the once famous affair of the Spanish 
marriages. Before considering this, it is necessary to give a brief 
retrospect of affairs in Spain. 

§ 36. Ferdinand VII., after having been restored to power by 
French intervention in 1823, was able to finish his reign in com- 
parative peace. In 1829 he married a fourth wife, Maria Christina 
of Naples, a sister of the duchess of Berry. Although his three 
previous marriages had been unfruitful, the king still hoped for 
children, and issued a “ pragmatic sanction” abolishing the Salic law 
in Spain. Against this act a formal protest was made by the king’s 
brothers, Don Carlos and Francisco, and also by the Bourbons of 
France and Naples. In 1830 the queen gave birth to a daughter, 
Isabella, who was at once recognised as heiress to the throne. 
During a severe illness the king was induced to recall the pragmatic 
sanction, but on his recovery he was persuaded by his wife to re- 
issue it. In 1833 Ferdinand VII. died, Isabella II. was proclaimed 
queen, and her mother undertook the government as regent. Don 
Carlos at once announced his intention of claiming the crown by 
legal right, and rallied round him all the adherents of absolute rule, 
and especially the inhabitants of the Basque provinces. Christina was 
compelled to rely upon the support of the liberals, and to conciliate 
them her minister, Martinez de la Rosa, issued a Spanish con- 
stitution, the Hstatuto Real, which established two chambers chosen 
by indirect election. The Quadruple Alliance of 1834 assured to the 
Christinos the support of France and Spain. In spite of this the 
Carlists maintained the upper hand, thanks to the military genius of 
their generals, Zumalacarregui and Cabrera. The “statuto Real, 
which had been drawn up under the influence of Louis Philippe, 
failed to satisfy the advanced liberals, and the Christinos split up 
into two parties, the moderados and the progresistas or exaltados, 
In 18386 the latter party compelled Christina to re-establish the con- 
stitution of 1812. This cooled the ardour of Louis Philippe for the 
liberal cause in Spain, and thus helped to bring about the fall of 
Thiers’ ministry in this year. Nevertheless, the regent constantly 
gained ground, especially after the death of Zumalacarregui in 18385. 
In 1839 Espartero, the general of the Christinos, compelled the 
Basque provinces to acknowledge Isabella. Don Carlos renounced 
his claims in favour of his eldest son, also named Carlos, went to 
Italy, and died in retirement at Trieste in 1855. Christira now tried 
to sever herself from the advanced liberals, and to rule with the help 


680 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. XXvV. 


of the moderados, who were under the patronage of Louis Philippe. 
But the progresisfas were supported by England, and found a power- 
ful leader in the victorious general Espartero. In 1840 Christina 
had to retire to France, and Espartero was appointed regent by the 
Cortes. But his devotion to the English alliance made him un- 
popular, the other officers were jealous of his power, and in 1843 he 
was forced to escape to England. Isabella was now declared of age, 
Christina returned to Madrid, and the moderados, under the leader- 
ship of Narvaez, the rival of Espartero, became all-powerful in 
Spain. In 1844 reactionary changes were made in the constitution, 
which curtailed the authority of the Cortes and restored many 
privileges to the crown and the church. 

French influence was now preponderant in Spain, and Louis 
Philippe determined to seize the opportunity of gratifying his 
dynastic ambition. The great question of the day was to find a 
husband for the young queen. The interests of England were 
directly opposed to any marriage which might give the Spanish 
crown toa French prince; Louis Philippe did not venture to propose 
a direct alliance with Isabella, but he determined to find a husband 
for her who would not be likely to have children, and to marry her 
younger sister, Maria Louisa, to his own son, the duke of Montpensier. 

‘This scandalously immoral scheme had the complete approval of 
Christina. In 1845 Louis Philippe had promised Queen Victoria 
in a personal interview at Eu, that his son’s marriage should not 
take place until Isabella had given birth to an heir. But the king’s 
honour was weaker than his ambition. _ On the 10th of October, 1846, 
the Spanish queen was married to her cousin Francis of Assis, a 
husband who satisfied the required conditions, and on the very same 
day the duke of Montpensier married Maria Louisa. Public opinion 
in Europe was profoundly scandalised by a transaction which must 
always remain a blot upon the character both of Louis Philippe and 
of M. Guizot. England was bitterly aggrieved, and although no 
open rupture took place, the English government was completely 
alienated from the Orleanist dynasty, which thus lost its firmest 
support at a time when it was most in need of it. And the intrigue 
had not even the scanty justification of success. Isabella gave birth 
to a daughter in 1851, whose paternity was more than doubtful, and 
before that time Louis Philippe had forfeited the French throne. 


CHAPTER XXVI. 


REVOLUTION AND REACTION. 


J. THe REVOLUTION oF 1848 In FRANCcE.—S§ 1. Discontent in France ; 
the political banquets; collision with the troops; abdication of Louis 
Philippe; proclamation of the Republic. § 2. General recognition of 
the provisional government; attack on the socialists. § 3. The 
national assembly ; suppression of the socialist rising ; Louis Napoleon. 
§ 4. The June riotsin Paris; dictatorship of Cavaignac; restoration 
of order. I]. THE REVOLUTION IN GERMANY AND ITALY.—$ 5. 
Radical movements in Switzerland; war of the Sonderbun?; new 
Swiss constitution. § 6. Retrospect of German history. § 7. The 
March revolutions in Germany; the Vorparlament. § 8. The 
Schleswig-Holstein question; Prussian troops in the duchies. § 9. 
Italy before 1848; election of PiusIX.; his reforming measures; 
Austrian occupation of Ferrara; constitutions granted in the Italian 
states. § 10. Revolt of Lombardy; a republic in Venice; Charles 
Albert declares war against Austria; retreat of Radetzky to Verona; 
revolt of Sicily. § 11. The northern war in 1848; successes of 
Charles Albert: battle of Custozza; Austrian reconquest of Lombardy. 
§ 12. Events in Rome; murder of Rossi; flight of Pius IX.; the 
Roman Republic; the Republic in Florence. § 13. Movements in 
Hungary and Bohemia; rising in Vienna; Ferdinand goes to Innspriick ; 
reduction of Prague by Windischgratz; the Slavs and Magyars in 
Hungary; Ferdinand returns to Vienna; open war with Hungary ; 
third rising in Vienna; Ferdinand at Olmiitz; siege and capture of 
Vienna; abdication of Ferdinand. § 14. The war in Hungary ; suc- 
cesses of the insurgents; Russian intervention ; reduction of Hungary. 
§ 15. Charles Albert renews the war in Lombardy; battle of Novara; 
accession of Victor Emmanuel; Haynau in Brescia; conclusion of 
peace. § 16. The Austrians in Central Italy; the French in Rome; 
fall of the Roman Republic; conquest of Venice; reduction of Naples 
and Sicily. § 17. The reaction in Berlin. § 18. The German 
Parliament at Frankfort ; party divisions; the archduke John chosen 
as administrator; Schleswig and Holstein; the truce of Malmé; 
defeat of the democrats. § 19. The “fundamental rights”; the 
constitution; the ‘‘Great German” and “ Little German” parties; 
offer of the hereditary empire to the king of Prussia, § 20. 
Frederick William IV. refuses the empire; his motives; the May 
revolutions; end of the Parliament. § 21. Aims of Prussia; the 
‘league of the three kings”; the Interim; second: Parliament of 
Erfurt. § 22. The Unionand the Bundestay; the Kreuz party at 
Berlin; rising in Hesse-Cassel; the conference of Olmiitz ; humilia- 
tion of Prussia; the conference of Dresden; restoration of the 


682 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. XXVI. 


Bund. § 23. Settlement of the Schleswig-Holstein question. III. 
TuE SECOND REPUBLIC AND THE SECOND EMPIRE IN FRANCE.—§ 24. 
The republican constitution; Louis Napoleon is elected President. 

25. Policy of Louis Napoleon; reactionary measures; growing 
hostility between the President and the Assembly. § 26. The coup 
d'état of December 2, 1851; revival of theempire; Napoleon III. § 27, 
Condition of France; Napoleon’s marriage; his personal character ; 
foreign policy. 


I, Tue REVOLUTION IN FRANCE. 


§ 1. Tue Orleanist monarchy had long lost all hold upon the affec- 
tions or the respect of the people. ‘The middle classes still clung to 
it, but they had no policy and no organisation. ‘They had utilised 
their period of power to amass wealth and had thought of nothing else. 
They showed their gratitude by giving the ministry of Guizot a 
docile majority in the chambers. Satisfied with the material luxury 
that they enjoyed, they doggedly opposed the introduction of any 
change. Louis Philippe had not gained in capacity with advancing 
years: his avarice had grown upon him, and he had lost all touch 
with public opinion. Lord Palmerston, now foreign secretary in 
England, showed his indignation about the Spanish marriages by 
encouraging liberal movements in Switzerland and Italy which could 
not but react upon France. Outside the pays légal of qualified 
electors the greatest discontent prevailed, but the government paid 
no attention to it. The workmen of Paris and the other large towns 
were imbned with the socialist ideas of Louis Blanc. Gross 
instances of bribery and corruption were made public, but the 
ministers contented themselves with obtaining a vote of amnesty 
from their hired majority. The so-called liberals, with M. Thiers at 
their head, wished to oust their rivals from office, but they had no 
real desire toalter a system under which they had risen to political 
power, and they were afraid of going too far for fear of alienating the 
king. Under these circumstances the only hope of reform lay iu 
the radical party, nominally headed by Odilon Barrot, but really 
guided by fiery orators like Lamartine, Ledru-Rollin, and Garnier- 
Pagés. Their object was to force on a measure of electoral reform 
which should give power to the excluded classes, and strike at the 
root of the prevailing corruption. Allied with them, but aiming at 
different and more extensive objects, were the socialists, led by 
Louis Blanc, Barbés, Blanqui, etc. As the extreme party was in a 
hopeless minority in the chambers, they were compelled to appeal 
to the outside public. In 1847 they organised a regular campaign of 
political banquets, at which toasts were given and speeches made on 
behalf of reform. Both in Paris and the provinces these banquets 
were numerously and enthusiastically attended, and the moderate 


A.D. 1847-1848. REVOLUTION IN FRANCE. 683 


reformers found themselves more and more thrown into the back- 
round by the republicans. 

When the chambers met in December, 1847, a great sensation 
was caused by the royal speech, which alluded to the recent agitation 
as fomented by “les passions ennemies ou aveugles.” This was a 
virtual declaration of war, and the opposition hastened to accept it 
as such. But all their amendments were rejected by the minis- 
terial majority, and it became more evident than ever that the 
struggle must be fought out outside the chambers. A grand banquet 
was organised for the 19th of February, but the prefect of police pro- 
hibited it. The date was then altered to the 22nd, and the reformers 
announced their intention of disregarding the prohibition. A com- 
promise was arranged by which the question of legality was to be 
settled by a judicial trial. But an invitation to the national guard 
to attend without their arms was seized upon by the ministers as an 
infraction of the law, and the banquet was again prohibited. The 
troops were held in readiness to enforce the order, and the reformers 
abandoned their intention. ‘The government thought that a great 
victory had been gained and that all danger was over. The mob, 
however, ignorant that the banquet was abandoned, assembled in 
crowds in the streets, and had to be dispersed by the troops. But 
among the soldiers, and especially among the national guard, dis- 
content was rife, and loud cries were raised for reform and the fall 
of the ministers. With fatal weakness, Louis Philippe hastened to 
conciliate the malcontents. Guizot resigned on the 28rd, and 
M. Molé was entrusted with the formation of a ministry. But the 
disturbances in the streets continued, and were encouraged by the 
leaders of the extreme party, who had far greater objects in view 
than a mere change in ministers. In the evening of the 23rd, the 
mob was confronted by a troop of soldiers in front of the ministry of 
foreign affairs. A chance shot was fired by some unknown person, 
and the soldiers discharged a fatal volley into the midst of the 
crowd. The bodies of the slain were paraded through the streets, 
indignant crowds commenced to raise barricades, and the revolution 
had begun. M. Molé failed to form a ministry, and Louis Philippe 
turned in despair to M. Thiers. The latter insisted that Odilon 
Barrot should be allowed to join him, and that electoral reform should 
at once be granted. ‘The king could do nothing but yield, and the 
new ministers at once issued a proclamation announcing their 
appointment and that the troops had received orders to cease firing. 
But the moment for reconciliation was passed, the proclamation was 
disregarded, and M. Thiers disappeared. The troops accepted the 
order as final and began to fraternise with the people. Louis Philippe 
left the Tuileries to review the national guard, but was greeted 


684 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. XXVI. 


with shouts of Vive la réforme! He returned with the conviction 
that all was lost, and abdicated in favour of his grandson, the count 
of Paris. In defiance of the recent law, it was announced that the 
duchess of Orleans should be regent instead of the duke of Nemours. 
The duchess was at once conducted to the chamber of deputies, but 
the mob stormed the doors and forbade the acceptance of the regency. 
A provisional government was appointed, consisting of Dupont de 
l’ Kure, the veteran leader of the opposition, Lamartine, Arago, Ledru- 
Rollin, Crémieux, -Garnier-Pagés and Marie. Louis Philippe, after 
several adventures, succeeded in escaping to England, where he took 
up his residence at Claremont, and died there after two years of retire- 
ment. Most of the members of his family joinel him in England, 
except the duchess of Orleans, who, with her two sons, took refuge 
with her mother in Germany. 

Immediately after their appointment the members of the provi- 
sional government proceeded to the Hétel de Ville, which they found 
already in the possession of the socialist leaders, Louis Blanc, Mar- 
rast, Flocon, and Albert (a working-man). A contest was judiciously 
avoided by admitting these men to the government, at first as 
secretaries, but afterwards as full members. In the evening of the 
24th a republic was proclaimed, and edicts were issued dissolving 
the chamber of deputies and prohibiting any meeting of the peers. 
Rarely in history have so many and such important events been 
crowded into the space of one day, and perhaps no movement has 
ever been attended with such unexpectedly sudden success. The 
hostility against the government was no stronger than it had been 
for the last few years, there was no sufficient motive for such a com- 
plete overthrow of existing institutions, and nothing but the blind 
weakness of the king and his advisers could have given such a victory 
to their opponents. It was truly a révolution du mépris as Lamartine 
had prophesied, but it is not often that contempt inspires a revolution. 

§ 2. The provisional government was speedily recognised on all 
sides. ‘The provinces offered no opposition to the will of the capital. 
Generals Bugeaud and Changarnier offered the allegiance of the army. 
Even the church hastened to welcome a revolution that showed 
no hostility to religion. The Archbishop of Paris, M.Affre, took 
the lead in ordering a solemn service for those who had fallen on the 
23rd. A moderate circular was issued by Lamartine, who assumed 
the control of foreign affairs, to re-assure the neighbouring states as 
to the peaceful intentions of France. England, as in 1830, was the 
first to acknowledge the new republic, and most of the continental 
countries were too absorbed in their own affairs to think of inter- 
vention in France. But in spite of this unanimous recognition, the 
government had one very serious difficulty to deal with in the 


A.D. 1848.” THE FRENCH REPUBLIC. 685 


demands of the working-classes. Jf the revolution had any real 
principle, it was a victory of socialism. The socialists had obtained 
admission to the government itself, and though Lamartine and 
several of his colleagues realised the hopelessness of their schemes, it 
was impossible to refuse all concessions to their allies. Accordingly, 
Louis Blane and Albert were appointed president and vice-president of 
a commission to superintend the ‘‘ organisation of labour.” The only 
expedient which the commission could suggest was to recognize 
the duty of the state to provide work for every man who demanded 
it, and to carry this out by the erection of national workshops. 
This experiment, which had signally failed during the first Revo- 
lution, and which could only end in supporting the idle at the ex- 
pense of the industrious, was again put into practice. Within a 
fortnight more than 40,000 men had assembled at the workshops, 
and their numbers continued to be swelled by arrivals from the pro- 
vinces. But this failed to satisfy the extreme party, and their leaders, 
Cabet, Blanqui, and Raspail tried to drive the government to adopt 
communistic measures. On the 16th of April a mob of artisans 
marched to the Hétel de Ville, but they found the national guard 
drawn up before the building and were received with cries of @ bas les 
communistes! For the moment the party of order had triumphed. 
§ 3. The national assembly, which had been summoned to draw 
up a new constitution, met on the 27th of April. All artificial re- 
strictions upon the franchise were swept away, every man of 21 years 
had a vote, and every man of 25 was qualified to be elected. The 
number of deputies was fixed at nine hundred, and under the cir- 
cumstances the elections were conducted with marvellous order and 
regularity. The provisional government resigned its powers into 
the hands of the assembly, which at once formally decreed the 
Republic. The next act was to appoint an executive commission of 
five members. The result was the election of Arago with 725 votes, 
Garnier-Pagés with 715, Marie with 702, Lamartine with 643, and 
Ledru-Rollin with 458. The socialists were altogether excluded, 
and were driven to adopt extreme measures. They endeavoured to 
excite the national sympathy for Poland, where a spasmodic attempt 
had been made to recover independence. On the 15th of May a 
procession marched to the assembly to present a petition on behalf 
of the Poles. No preparations had been made for resistance, the 
mob stormed the hall, and set to work to elect a new government. 
The slightest weakness might have involved France in ruin. But 
the government stood firm, the national guard and the garde mobile, 
a body that had been formed by Lamartine out of the gamins of the 
Paris streets, rallied round them, the conspirators lost both their 
courage and their senses, and order was restored without serious 


686 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. XXVI. 


difficulty. Most of the leaders were captured: Barbés and Albert 
were sentenced to transportation, and Blanqui to seven years 
imprisonment ; Louis Blanc, who had intrigued against the govern- 
ment since his own exclusion, escaped punishment by flight. 

Among the numerous adhesions to the Republic, not the least un- 
expected and embarrassing had been that of Louis Napoleon, who 
had hastened to leave England for Paris. By the advice of the pro- 
visional government he had returned to London. But the reaction- 
ary party sought to use his name for their own purposes, and he 
was elected as deputy for Paris and for two other departments. This 
gave rise to a serious debate in the assembly. A law banishing the 
Bonaparte family from French soil had never been repealed, and 
Lamartine proposed that it should be put in force. But the law 
was practically obsolete, and two Bonapartes, sons of Jerome and 
Lucien, were actually members of the assembly. The difficulty 
was solved by Louis Napoleon himself, who wrote in haughty and 
ambiguous language, offering to serve his country by remaining in 
exile, and ultimately declined the offered seat. 

§ 4. Meanwhile the public workshops had become an obvious 
nuisance. The number of workmen was more than 100,000, and 
the expense of maintaining them amounted to more than 14 million 
francs. Private enterprise was almost at a standstill. The govern- 
ment determined upon vigorous measures to put down the evil. A 
decree was issued on the 22nd of June which ordered all unmarried 
workmen from the ages of 18 to 25 to enter the army, while the 
rest were to be transferred to the departments. All whe refused 
were to be excluded from the workshops. This decree gave 
rise to a terrible conflict in Paris. The workmen threw up enor- 
mous barricades, defended them with the heroism of despair, and for 
four days more than held their own. The executive committee had 
to resign their powers, and General Cavaignac was appointed dic- 
tator. ‘The archbishop of Paris, M. Affre, was slain by a chance 
bullet as he was attempting to mediate a peace, and the losses among 
the troops were very great. Ultimately, superior numbers and dis- 
cipline secured the victory, the last barricade in the Faubourg St. 
Antoine was stormed on the 28th, and the anarchists were com- 
pelled to submit. Cavaignac resigned his dictatorship, but was 
appointed president of the council. A decree was now promulgated 
abolishing the workshops altogether, and was silently obeyed. 
Socialism was completely defeated, but in its fall it dragged down 
the Republic. The fear of democratic anarchy became the dominant 
motive of all who had anything to lose, and they were now ready 
to welcome any form of government, however absolute, bipe would 
secure the rights of property. 


A.D. 1836—1848 SWITZERLAND. 687 


ll, Tue REVOLUTION IN GERMANY AXD ITALY. 


§ 5. The example of Paris exerted its wonted fascination over the 
continental states. The year 1848 is an annus mirabilis in Euro- 
pean history. On every side thrones and dynasties seemed tottering 
to ruin, and each day brought the news of another revolution. Among 
the first countries to feel the revolutionary impulse was Switzerland, 
always keenly sensitive to French influence, and where the soil had 
been prepared by previous events. The radical party, humiliated by 
the enforced expulsion of the political refugees in 1836, had turned 
its attention to religious questions, and made a determined attack 
upon the church. In 18389 the famous author of the Life of Christ, 
Dr. Strauss, had been appointed professor at the university of 
Zurich, but such indignation was expressed by the orthodox inhab- 
itants that the appointment had to be cancelled, and the liberals lost 
the control of the government of Zurich for the next six years. In 
1841 a more important contest was provoked by the abolition of 
the monasteries in Aargau. The Roman Catholic majority in 
Lucerne answered this measure by admitting the Jesuits and 
entrusting to them the management of education. ‘This excited the 
radicals to active measures, and as the Zagsatzung, or assembly of 
the Bund, refused to support them, free bands (/re’schaaren) were 
formed to coerce their opponents. The Roman Catholic cantons, 
Uri, Schwyz, Unterwalden, Lucerne, Zug, Freiburg, and Wallis, 
formed a separate league, the Sonderbund, for mutual defence 
(1845). The great powers tried to bring about an agreement, 
but were foiled by their want of unanimity. Austria wished 
to support the Sonderbund, while England allied itself with the 
radicals, and France vacillated between the two sides. In 1847 the 
war broke out and was speedily ended in the complete defeat of the 
Sonderbund, which was dissolved and its members had to pay the 
expenses of the war. The Jesuits were expelled and escaped to 
Italy. The radicals were encouraged by their victory to revive 
their old plan of forming an orderly and compact federation. The 
French revolution gave them new strength, and in September, 1848, 
the new constitution was introduced. ‘The supreme power was 
vested in two assemblies, the national council, representing the 
state as a whole, and the council of estates, representing the 
separate cantons, ‘The two bodies combined to appoint a federal 
council, which was to sit in Berne and to wield the executive power, 
and also a federal court of justice. 

§ 6. The history of Germany is almost a complete blank between 
the revolutionary movements of 1830 and 1848. The Bund, the 
only representative of German unity, was a hopelessly inert mass, 


688 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. Xxvi. 


which did nothing but oppose a passive resistance to reform. The 
subdivision into inuumerable petty states was maintained by the 
overwhelming influence of Russia, which was always exerted to 
prevent any aggrandisement of Prussia or Austria. These two 
states, which absorbed most of the material strength of Germany, 
regarded each other with a jealousy that made the Czar the ne- 
cessary arbitrator between them. In Austria, Francis I. had been 
succeeded in 18385 by his son Ferdinand I., but the change of 
rulers only gave greater power to Metternich, who continued with 
cynical obstinacy to maintain an antiquated system of government 
which was ready to fall at the first touch. In 1837, the death of 
William LY. separated England from Hanover, and the latter crown, 
from which females were excluded, fell to Ernest Augustus, duke 
of Cumberland. ‘The first act of the new king was to abolish the 
constitution of 1833, and to dismiss seven Gottingen professors who 
protested against this arbitrary measure. In 1840, Frederick William 
IV. succeeded his father in Prussia, but he did little to alter the 
system that had prevailed in Berlin since 1815. The last relic of 
Polish independence was done away with in 1846, when the 
republic of Krakau, on the pretext of an insurrection, was 
incorporated with Austria. 

§ 7. In March, 1848, the revolutionary wave broke over Germany 
with such force that resistance was hardly dreamed of. Rulers 
hastened to secure their thrones by granting all the demands of 
their subjects, and by admitting to office the men who had hitherto 
been the prominent leaders of opposition. The constitution of — 
Baden (3 March) was the model which was copied in the other 
states. Its chief points were the freedom of the press, trial by jury, 
political equality of all creeds, responsibility of ministers, abolition 
of feudal obligations, and equal taxation. Everywhere the people 
agitated for these or similar reforms, and everywhere they were 
sranted. No day passed without the appearance of a new 
constitution. In Darmstadt, Nassau, Hesse-Cassel, Oldenburg, 
Brunswick, the four Hanse Towns, Weimar, and Wiirtemberg, the 
outlines of the story are so similar that the details become 
insignificant. Only the three great middle-states, Saxony, Bavaria, 
and Hanover, delayed their action to see what was done by their two 
powerful neighbours. 

But the acquisition of constitutional liberties for the separate 
states was by no means the sole object of the liberal party, Their 
keenest wish was to reform the Bund, and to give substantial unity 
to Germany as a compact federation. As to the constitution of 
this federation very opposite views prevailed, the democrats wishing 
to establish a German republic, while the more moderate party hoped 


A.D. 1835-1848. AUSTRIA AND PRUSSIA. 689 


to create a federal empire under the headship of Prussia. It was in 
the south-western states, where internal liberty was most firmly 
rooted, that this desire for unity was strongest. Qn March 8 a 
number of liberal leaders met at Heidelberg, and issued a formal 
invitation to the German states to send deputies to a Vorparlament, 
which was to prepare the way for a permanent national representa- 
tion. It was impossible for the princes to allow the settlement of 
so great a question to pass out of their hands. Accordingly, Prussia 
and Austria agreed to hold a conference of princes on March 15, to 
consider the proposed reform of the Bund. But before that date 
the two great powers had felt the force of the revolution. 

The news of the events in Paris was enough in itself to overturn 
the ill-cemented edifice of the Austrian state. The Hungarians, 
inspired by the eloquence of Kossuth, clamoured for an independent 
diet and diminished taxes.’ Similar demands were made in Prague. 
The populace of Vienna, usually so contented and pleasure-loving, 
demanded the dismissal of Metternich. Without an effort at 
resistance the famous diplomatist fled to England, and the Aus- 
trian government was left to the direction of the mob. The feeble 
Ferdinand I. granted freedom to the press, allowed the formation 
of a citizen guard, and promised a liberal constitution. 

In Prussia, Frederick William IV. offered a stubborn resistance to 
the demands for constitutional liberties which arrived from all parts 
of his kingdom, and especially from the Rhenish Provinces. But the 
report of the occurrences in Vienna led to formidable disturbances 
in Berlin and made concessions unavoidable. On March 17 the 
king promised freedom of the press, the summons of a Landtag on 
April 2, the “ transformation of the German Confederation (Staten- 
bund) into a Federal State (Bundestat),” and the incorporation of 
East and West Prussia and Posen'in the Bund. Liberal as these 
assurances were they failed to satisfy the people, who now clamoured 
for the dismissal of the soldiers from the town and the formation of 
a citizen guard. On March 18 the mob came into collision with 
the troops, barricades were raised, and for fourteen hours a terrible 
battle was waged in the streets of Berlin. At last the king gave 
way, ordered the troops to withdraw, dismissed his ministry, and 
granted an unconditional amnesty to all political prisoners. His 
brother, William Prince of Prussia, who was regarded as a leader of 
the reactionary party, departed to England. From this moment 
Frederick William determined to put himself at the head of the 
liberal movement, and thus to satisfy the party which desired to see 
Prussia at the head of a united Germany. Heassumed the German 
colours and issued a proclamation in. which he undertook as a 
constitutional king to be the “ leader of a free and new-born German 

31 


690 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. XXvVI 


nation ” (21 March). Two days later he had to attend with bare 
head the funeral of the 183 victims of the 18th of March. But the 
memory of that day stood between him and the realisation of his 
new aims, and Prussia had for the moment lost all popularity and 
respect in Germany. 

The revolutions in Vienna and Berlin decided the action of those 
states which had hitherto hesitated. On March 16, the king of 
Saxony appointed a liberal ministry. Lewis of Bavaria had to dis- 
miss his hated mistress, Lola Montez (the Countess Landsfeldt), 
and on March 20 he abdicated in favour of his son Maximilian IL., 
who at once conceded the popular demands. Ernest Augustus of 
Hanover was compelled to grant a constitution on the model of 
that of Baden. Thus, by the end of March the liberals had 
triumphed in every state of Germany. 

The Vorparlament, composed mainly of deputies from the lesser 
states, met at Frankfort on March 31, and speedily completed its 
work. It decreed that the federal government should consist of a 
single head with two chambers, a senate and a house of popular 
representatives. The German people as a whole was to enjoy the 
same liberties which had been secured to the members of the 
individual states. The details of the constitution were to be 
settled by a national assembly to be elected without any regard to 
class divisions, wealth, or religion. ‘The princes were to be excluded 
from all voice in the matter. Before separating, the assembly 
nominated a committce of fifty to superintend the carrying out 
of these decrees. But the proceedings at Frankfort altogether 
failed to satisfy the democratic party, which had conceived the 
extravagant plan of forming a German republic. Their leaders 
determined to give up constitutional action and resort to force. 
They stirred up the people to revolt, and organised bands of 
volunteers to terrify the established government. But in the brief 
struggle which followed the republicans were defeated, and their 
commander, Hecker, displayed neither ability nor courage. 

§ 8. Beside domestic revolutions and reforms, Germany had a 
difficult question to deal with in the relations of the duchies of 
Schleswig and Holstein with Denmark. Both contained a large 
German population, and Holstein was a member of the Bund. 
Both were hostile to Danish rule, and were especially indignant 
at the attempts to destroy their independent nationality and to 
incorporate them with Denmark. ‘The question was complicated 
by the prospect of a disputed succession. Females were entitled 
to succeed in Denmark, but were excluded from the duchies. In 
1846 Christian VIII., whose only son was unlikely to have children, 
issued a decree, the offene Briefe, in which he declared the whole 


Ap. 1848. SCHLESWIG-HOLSTEIN. 691 


Danish state to be indivisible and to be heritable by females as 
well as males. ‘This excluded the duke of Augustenburg, the 
nearest male heir, and was a great blow to the inhabitants of 
Schleswig and Holstein, who had hoped, on the extinction of the 
Danish male line, to fall under the separate rule of a German prince. 
In January, 1848, Christian VIII. died, and was succeeded by his 
son, Frederick VII., who at once issued a liberal constitution in the 
hope of allaying discontent. But his German subjects refused to 
sell their independence at any price, and the revolutionary move- 
ment in Germany came just in time to give them new courage. 
The assemblies of the two duchies joined themselves together (18 
March), and demanded that both should be admitted to the Bund 
and have a joint constitution, on the German model. On the 24th 
a provisional government was formed, with the duke of Augusten- 
burg at its head. Frederick VII. treated these acts as rebellion, 
and sent anarmy into the duchies. But public opinion in Germany 
was warmly excited in their behalf, and the Vorparlament went 
out of its way to decree the admission of Schleswig to the Bund. 
The king of Prussia, eager to fall in with the current of opinion, 
sent an army to assist the duke of Augustenburg. On land the 
Prussians, under Wrangel, gained several successes, but the want of 
a fleet prevented any decisive result from being obtained, and the 
favour shown to Denmark by Russia and England induced Frederick 
William to recall his troops before any settlement had been made. 
§ 9. No part of Europe was so quiet and at the same time so 
profoundly discontented as Italy in the first years of the fifth decade 
of the century. Austrian rule pressed like a leaden weight upon 
the provinces of Lombardy and Venetia. A powerful army, under 
Marshal Radetsky, stood ready to crush the slightest symptom of 
revolt. ‘The press was subject to the most rigorous censorship, and 
so searching was the system of espionage that no one ventured to 
breathe a word of complaint. The upper classes were purposely en- 
couraged to lead a licentious life, that they might lose all thought 
of political liberty. In the other provinces Austrian influence was 
supreme, and was employed to support the arbitrary government 
of the princes. In Naples and Sicily Ferdinand II. (1880-1859) 
crushed his subjects under a despotism of terror. In the Papal 
States Gregory XVI. (1831-1846) maintained the worst of all 
forms of government, the absolutism of the clergy. Leopold II. 
of Tuscany was personally benevolent and well-intentioned, but 
did not venture to depart from the system of rule prescribed from 
Vienna. ‘The lesser rulers of Modena, Parma, and Lucca were the 
powerless vassals of Austria. In Piedmont Charles Albert had 
never ventured to return to the liberal principles of his youth. 


692 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. XXVL 


Economic reforms were introduced, but no steps were taken towards 
constitutional reform. The King was a devout Roman Catholic, 
and the Austrian government began to regard him as one who had 
fully repented of his past follies. The only disturbance to public 
tranquillity arose from the isolated and hopeless revolts excited by 
Mazzini and his society of ‘* Young Italy,” which the people did 
not venture to support, and which only served to keep alive the 
idea of independence and the desire of revenge. 

This lethargy was suddenly interrupted from a wholly unexpected 
quarter. In June, 1846, Gregory XVI. died, and the choice of the 
conclave fell upon one of the youngest cardinals, Mastai Ferrctti, 
who took the name of Pius 1X. 'The new pope was chosen mainly 
on account of his feeble health, but he was destined to the longest 
and one of the most eventful pontificates recorded in history. 
Eager to obtain popularity, Pius IX. signalised his accession by 
reforming measures which made a profound impression in Europe. 
He issued an amnesty for all political offenders, recalled the 
exiles, and appointed a council to aid him in the government. 
Italy resounded with cries of ELvviva Pio Nono! and the pope 
became for a bricf period tne idol of his countrymen. Moderate 
liberals had long been accustomed to regard the papacy as the 
one genuinely Italian government in the peninsula, and they 
welcomed the prospect of reviving national unity and independence 
under papal guidance. Meanwhile the news from Rome was re- 
ceived in Vienna with mingled dismay and indignation. Metternich 
declared that a liberal pope was the one contingency that had never 
been anticipated. By the treaty of Vienna, Austria was allowed 
to keep a garrison in the fortress of Ferrara, and, as a counter- 
demonstration, the troops now occupied the city as well. Pius IX. 
bitterly protested against this act as an infraction of his sovereign 
rights, and went so far as to prepare for armed resistance, amidst 
the enthusiastic plaudits of his subjects. 

The example of the pope naturally exercised great influence in 
the other Italian states. Leopold of ‘Tuscany hastened to conciliate 
the people with administrative reforms. Charles Louis of Lucca was 
compelled to make similar concessions, but he showed his personal 
antipathy by selling his duchy to the grand-duke of Tuscany and 
retiring from public life. Intense popular indignation was aroused 
by the settlement of the succession in Parma on the death of Maria 
Louisa (December, 1847). The Congress of Vienna had arranged that 
if she died childless, Parma should be given to the duke of Lucca, 
whose duchy was to be transferred to Tuscany, while the latter was 
to cede certain districts to the duke of Modena. This elaborate 
arrangement, based altogether upon dynastic interests, without any 


EE 


OO a a 


A.D. 1846-1848. RISINGS IN ITALY. 693 


regard to the wishes of the peoples concerned, was now carried out. 
Riots ensued, and Francis. V. of Modena invited the Austrians to 
occupy his duchy. In Southern Italy the movement was the more 
violent in proportion to the evilsit had to combat. Sicily threw off 
the Neapolitan yoke, and a provisional government was established 
in Palermo, under Ruggiero Settimo (Jan. 24, 1848). A. rising in 
Naples compelled Ferdinand II. to dismiss his ministers and to grant 
a liberal constitution (10th Feb.). The scruples of Charles Albert 
were removed when he found himself on the same side as the 
pope, and early in 1848 he drew up a constitution for Piedmont, the 
Statuto Fondamentale, which was issued on March 4. In Tuscany 
representative institutions were granted on February 17, and the 
revolution in Paris induced Pius IX. to take the final step, to which 
his previous measures had obviously tended. A ministry was formed 
under Cardinal Antonelli, in which for the first time the lay element 
preponderated, and a constitution was promulgated on March 14. 
‘This established two chambers—one composed of nominees of the 
pope, the other of popular representatives ; but the final decision on 
all matters was still reserved to the college of cardinals, 

§ 10. When the news arrived of the Viennese rising of March 13 
and the flight of Metternich, the flame of revolt at once broke out 
in the northern provinces. The lead was taken by Milan, where 
the citizens erected barricades, and for four days carried on a 
desperate contest against the Austrian troops. Radetsky might 
have destroyed the city by a bombardment, but he was afraid lest 
a sudden advance of the Sardinian army might cut off his com- 
munications with Austria. On the evening of the 22nd he quitted 
Milan and retreated towards the famous Quadrilateral formed: by 
the fortresses of Peschiera, Mantua, Legnago, and Verona. His 
retreat was the signal for a general rising. The duke of Parma fled 
without striking a blow. One after another Monza, Como, Bergamo, 
Brescia and Cremona threw off the rule of Austria. Venice was 
tamely resigned by Counts Palffy and Zichy, and the citizens 
restored the Republic under the presidency of Daniele Manin. 
Francis V. of Modena was driven from his duchy. Meanwhile 
Charles Albert had taken a decisive step. He declared war 
against Austria, crossed the Ticino with his army (March 25), 
and proceeded to pursue the retreating Austrians. Radetsky now 
took up his quarters at Verona and stood upon the defensive. 
Popular enthusiasm compelled the remaining Governments of the 
peninsula to espouse the national cause. The grand-duke of 
Tuscany ordered his troops to march to the frontier, Pius IX., 
torn by his conflicting interests as an Italian prince and as head 
of the Roman Catholic Church, found it impossible to resist 


694 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. XXVI. 


the ceneral impulse, and the Roman army was despatched to 
the Po. Even Ferdinand II. did not yet venture to obey his 
natural inclinations. ‘The Neapolitan army set out under Pepé, 
the flect was sent to Ancona, and Charles Albert was assured that 
Naples would co-operate actively in the war for Italian indepen- 
dence. But it was afterwards discovered that both the army and 
the fleet had received secret instructions to do nothing until the 
course of events had enabled the king to decide finally on his course 
of action. Ferdinand’s insincerity was soon made manifest. In 
defiance of his solemn oath to observe the constitution, he dis- 
solved the chamber of deputies before it had time to meet, formed 
a reactionary ministry, recalled his army, and decreed a complete 
change of the franchise. In consequence of these measures the 
Sicilians declared that the Bourbons had forfeited the crown, and 
prepared to offer the crown to the duke of Genoa, the second son of 
Charles Albert. 

§ 11. The Sardinian king had continued for some time to retain 
his advantage in the Lombard war. Radetsky refused to be drawn 
from his position at Verona until the arrival of reinforcements 
should enable him to take the aggressive. ‘Ihe result was that the 
Sardinian troops were able to overrun the country as far as the 
Adige, and a momentary repulse at Santa Lucia (6th May) was 
more than compensated by a distinguished success at Goito (30th 
May) and by the capture of Peschiera. Popular votes decreed 
the annexation of Lombardy, Modena, and Parma to Sardinia. 
That these bright prospects were soon overclouded was probably 
due to the error of Charles Albert himself. If he had at once 
advanced against Radetsky at the end of March, he mizht have 
finished the war at one blow. But he was afraid of the nationalists, 
who might utilise his victories to his own disadvantage; he was 
not cordially supported by the other rulers of the peninsula; and 
he trusted that English mediation and the rising in Hungary would 
compel Austria to cede Lombardy to him without further warfare. 
His hesitation secured the success of Radetsky, whose retreat, 
instead of being a sign of weakness, was a masterly stroke of policy. 
Strengthened by reinforcements under Welden, he suddenly left 
Verona, captured Vicenza, Treviso and Padua, and thus secured a 
second and safer line of communication with Austria. Turning 
against the Piedmontese, he inflicted a crushing defeat upon them 
at Custozza (25th July). Charles Albert retreated to Milan, closely 
pursued and harassed by the victorious army. Milan capitulated 
without striking a blow, and the last chance of retaining any 
hold upon Lombardy was gone. On August 8 Charles Albert 
signed an armistice, by which he surrendered Peschiera and 


os . _ F _ ee 


A.v. 1848. ITALY AND AUSTRIA. 695 


all posittons outside Lombardy, and engaged to withdraw the 
ships and troops that had been sent to the assistance of Venice. 
Lombardy was once more an Austrian province, and Radetsky 
prepared to complete his work by laying siege to Venice. 

§ 12. Pius IX. had already deserted the Italian cause when he 
discovered that it involved him in open war with Austria. From 
this time he began to think more of his dutiesas head of the church 
and less of temporal interests. ‘The result was that he soon lost the 
popularity which his liberal measures had given him. His reform- 
ing ministry naturally resigned when the pope would no longer 
assent to their measures. Count Rossi, who became head of a new 
ministry, alienated both the liberal and the reactionary parties, and 
Was assassinated on November 15. ‘The pope was so horrified by 
this act that he quitted Rome in disguise (Nov. 24) and took up his 
residence at Gaeta, under the protection of the King of Naples. The 
greatest excitement prevailed when the news of his departure was 
made known. The Roman parliament, which had met on the day 
of Rossi’s death, appointed an executive committee of three persons, 
and ordered the election of a constituent assembly. ‘The pope con- 
tented himself with issuing one brief after another to declare the 
nullity of all that was-done in his absence, but did nothing to 
strengthen the hands of the moderate party, who were still inclined 
to trust him. The constituent assembly, in which both Garibaldi 
and Mazzini had seats, decided that the pope had forfeited the tem- 
poral government of the State, that he should be guaranteed the 
independent exercise of his spiritual power, and that a pure de- 
mocracy should be created under the name of the Roman Republic. 
In Tuscany Leopold II. followed the pope’s example when he found 
that matters were going too far, and escaped first to San Stefano 
and then to Gaeta. As he refused to return, a Republic was pro- 
claimed in Florence under the presidency of Guerrazzi. 

§ 13. During the months which witnessed the overthrow and re- 
storation of the Austrian power in Italy, the home government was 
undergoing a great crisis. NKolowrat, who took Metternich’s place, 
was unequal to the task of maintaining order, and the government 
was carried on under the dictation of the students and the mob. 
The disturbances in the capital were stirred up by Kossuth, who 
aimed at freeing Hungary altogether from Hapsburg rule. The 
Emperor had already granted the Hungarians an independent 
ministry, in which Kossuth undertook the control of, finance. But 
the revolutionary party demanded a constitution on the model of 
that of Baden, and the Diet was terrified by an insurrection into 
passing a decree for its establishment. In Bohemia the Slavonic 
party also agitated for the formation of an independent govern- 


696 - MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. XXVI. 


ment and the exclusion of German elements. But the Slavs 
had no sympathy with the Magyars, and were willing to support 
the Hapsburgs if they would grant their demands. They were 
especially anxious to prevent the federal union of the German 
provinces of Austria with the rest of Germany. Kossuth deter- 
mined to effect his own aims and to frustrate those of Bohemia 
by terrifying the imperial government. A new constitution had 
been issued, which established the ordinary two chambers. On 
May 15 the populace of Vienna rose in revolt and demanded the 
abolition of the aristocratic chamber and the summons of a national 
assembly to reform the constitution. Resistance was impossible, 
and Ferdinand, by the advice of the reactionary party, escaped with 
his family from Vienna to Innspriick. ‘This was a very well-judged 
measure, because it freed the emperor from the influence of both 
the Hungarians and the Bohemians, while he could rely upon the 
support of the Tyrolese, always the most loyal subjects of the house 
of Hapsburg. 

In Vienna the wildest excitement prevailed for atime. The mob 
raised barricades in the streets, and civil war was only avoided by 
ordering the troops to leave the city. In Bohemia the Emperor’s 
departure to Innspriick was regarded as a serious blow, because it 
had been hoped that he would take up his residence in Prague and 
entrust the defence of the crown to his Slav subjects. His weak- 
ness and humiliation however still offered a favourable prospect of 
realising their designs. On June 2 a great Slavonic Congress was 
opened, under the presidency of Palacky, the historian. Three days 
later it was formally decreed that the Slavs would remain loyal sub- 
jects of the Hapsburgs on condition that the Austrian monarchy 
was organised as a federation. At the same time a provisional 
government was formed in Prague, and the Emperor was called upon 
to order Windischgratz, the commander of the garrison, to withdraw 
his troops. But before this could be answered, hostilities broke out. 
After an indecisive conflict in the streets, in which the wife of Win- 
Gischeritz was killed, the garrison retired outside the walls, but 
only to bombard the city from the surrounding hills. This decided 
the struggle. The opposition leaders made their escape, and Prague 
surrendered unconditionally (June 18). This was only a small 
success in itself, but, coupled with Radetsky’s victory in Italy, it 
had a great moral effect in restoring the courage and prestige of the 
Austrian Government. At the same time the movement in Hun- 
gary was seriously hampered by the action of the Slavonic portion 
of the population. The Slavs were always bitterly hostile to the 
Mazyars, and the project of establishing an independent state of 
Hungary threatened them with political annihilation. Their only 


ee 


A.D. 1848. AUSTRIA AND HUNGARY. _ 697 


hope lay in the maintenance of German rule, and they rose in 
wild revolt against the dominant party of Kossuth. The Magyars 
had also to carry on war against the Croats under their Ban 
Jellachich, who was secretly instigated by the imperial court. 
Meanwhile the constituent assembly, which Ferdinand had 
authorised before his departure, met on July 22. Race differences 
among its members made it difficult for them to come to any 
agreement, and they were soon absorbed in the thorny question of 
the relations of lords and serfs. But the presence of the assembly 
seemed to exercise a tranquillising effect upon Vienna, and the 
more favourable aspect of affairs emboldened the emperor to return 
to his capital (August 12). In the hope of ending the Hungarian 
war he nominated Count Lamberg commander of the troops in that 
kingdom, but the unfortunate general was murdered on the bridge 
of boats at Pesth. All hopes of reconciliation were now at an end, 
and open war was declared against the Hungarians. But this act 
also terminated the tranquillity at Vienna, which was in great 
measure due to the influence of Kossuth. On October 6 a third 
revolt commenced, and proved far more formidable than either of 
its predecessors. ts immediate object was to prevent the march of 
the troops who had been ordered to proceed to Hungary. The 
mob murdered Latour, the war minister, stormed the arsenals, 
and compelled the constituent assembly to demand from the 
Emperor the cessation of hostilities against the Hungarians. Fer- 
dinand again fled, this 1ime to Olmiitz, in Moravia. The garrison 
under Auersperg occupied a defensive position in the Belvedere 
gardens, and the city was left in the hands of the insurgents.. But 
their triumph was very short-lived, Jellachich with his Croats 
marched from the Raab against Vienna, and Windischgriitz, the 
victor of Prague, was appointed commander-in-chief of all Austrian 
troops outside Italy. By October 23 the city was closely invested 
on all sides. But the besieged, confident in the approaching aid 
from Hungary, refused to yield, and for several days carried on a 
desperate struggle against superior forces. On the 30th the Hun- 
garian troops were seen in the distance, but they were repulsed 
after a short engagement on the Schwechat. This sealed the fate 
of Vienna, which surrendered on the next day. The rebels received 
the prompt punishment of military justice. ‘The Austrian monarchy 
was saved. On November 24 a new ministry was formed, under 
Felix Schwarzenberg, the resolute head of the reactionary party. 
On December 2 the Emperor Ferdinand abdicated in favour of his 
nephew, Francis Joseph; on the ground that “ younger powers were 
needed to carry out the reforms that had been commenced.” The 
change of rulers was really the signal of approaching reaction. 
31* 


698 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. XXvI. 


The constituent assembly, which had been transferred from Vienna 
to Kremsier, was dissolved (March 7, 1849), and a new constitution 
was granted “by the grace of the emperor.” 

§ 14. The new emperor, I’rancis Joseph, recognised that his first 
task was the reduction of Hungary, and entrusted Windischeritz 
with the completion of the work which had been so successfully 
commenced at Prague and Vienna. ‘he Hungarians refused to 
accept the abdication of Ferdinand, and the government was still 
carried on in his name. Kossuth was compelled to adopt this 
course to conciliate the army and its leader, Gérgey, who were 
determined not to act as rebels, and had no sympathy with the 
republican aspirations of the great orator. Windischgritz began 
the campaign on December 15, and met with no real opposition to 
his early movements. Kossuth’s plan was to give up western 
Hungary to the invaders, in order to entice them into the marshy 
districts of the interior during the winter season. The committee 
of national defence, of which Kossuth’ was president, abandoned 
Pesth, and the city was occupied by the Austrians (Jan. 5, 1849). 
From this moment the cause of the insurgents triumphed. Bem, 
a Polish exile, who had commanded in the recent defence of Vienna 
and had escaped from the conquerors, was sent to act against the 
Saxon population of Transylvania, which refused to accept the rule of 
the Magyars and maintained the cause of the imperial government. 
By the end of February he succeeded in reducing the whole pro- 
vince. Windischgratz now advanced from Pesth into the interior. At 
Kapolna (Feb. 26-7) a two days’ battle took place, in which neither 
side could claim a decisive victory, but the Hungarians retired to 
the river Theiss. There a number of battles were fought to defend 
the passage of the river, and everywhere the Austrians were repulsed. 
Gorgey was now able to take the aggressive, and carried all before 
him. Windischgriitz was recalled, but his successor, Welden, found 
it necessary to evacuate Pesth. The Hungarians returned to the 
capital in triumph, and stormed Buda (Ofen), on the opposite bank 
of the Danube, after a heroic defence on the part of the garrison 
(21 May). The Austrian army retreated to Pressburg, in the 
extreme west of the kingdom. ‘The triumph of the insurgents was 
celebrated by the declaration of Hungarian indepenbence (14 Aprit), 
and the creation of a provisional government, with Kossuth at its 
head. ‘This bold step destroyed the last chance of a compromise, 
but at the same time it alienated Gorgey, who henceforth acted in 
complete independence. 

The Austrian government began to despair of reducing Hungary 
by its own efforts, and turned for assistance to Russia, the patron of 
all states contending against revolution, On May 21, the very day 


ee eae eee 


ae oe ee oe 


a. 


A.D. 1849. REDUCTION OF HUNGARY 699 


on which Buda surrendered, Francis Joseph met the Czar ina 
personal interview at Warsaw. Nicolas was afraid lest the success 
of the Hungarians might provoke a rising in Poland, which was 
the more likely as many Poles were serving in the Hungarian 
army, aud willingly accorded the aid that was demanded. In 
June Paskiewitsch entered Hungary with 130,000 men, and the 
command of the Austrians was entrusted to Haynau, already 
notorious for the sevetity with which he had treated the defeated 
Italians of Lombardy. ‘The eloquence of Kossuth induced the 
Hungarians to carry on a desperate guerilla warfare against the 
invaders. But the contest was too unequal, and the differences 
between the military and the civil leaders weakened the national 
cause. At ‘lemesvar one division of the Hungarian army, under 
Dembinski, was crushed by Haynau (9 August). Kossuth now 
resigned his office and proceeded to '‘l'ransylvania. Gérgey was 
appointed dictator, but he had already opened negotiations with 
the Russians, and on August 13 he surrendered with his whole 
army to general Riidiger at Vilagos. This practically ended the 
war. Kossuth and Bem fled to Turkey, where the Porte refused 
to give them up. Gorgey was able to secure his personal safety, 
but the other leaders received scant mercy from Haynau and his 
military tribuuals. Hungary had to pay dearly for its rebellion. 
It lost all independence and all constitutional freedom, and sank 
for a short time into a vassal province of Austria. 

§ 15. Meanwhile the temporary success of the Hungarians in the 
early part of 1849 had involved Austria in a second Italian war. 
All the attempts of England and France to negotiate a final peace 
between Austria and Sardinia had failed. The government at 
Vienna refused to entertain any proposal except the complete 
restoration of Austrian rule and of the governments allied with 
Austria. For Charles Albert to accept these terms, except under 
the pressure of complete defeat, would deprive the Sardinian 
monarchy for ever of the respect and trust of Italy. On March 9 
the king took the bold step of putting an end to the armistice, 
which had been prolonged since August, 1848. It was hoped that 
the Austrian arms would be sufficiently employed in the Hungarian 
war and in the siege of Venice. But Radetsky was confident of 
success, and hastened to engage in a contest which he hoped would 
finally settle affairs in Italy. Instead of waiting to be attacked he 
invaded Piedmont, and in the battle of Novara inflicted a crushing 
defeat upon the Sardinians, who were commanded by the Polish 
general Chrzanowski (23 March). So disastrous was the battle, and 
so exorbitant the terms proposed by Radetsky, that on the same 
evening Charles Albert abdicated in favour of his eldest son, Victor 


700 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP, XXvI. 


Emmanuel II., and quitted Italy for Oporto, where he died on 
July 28. Thenew king was married tothe daughter of an Austrian 
archduke, and had not inspired the same invincible distrust as_ his 
father. Radetsky now offered an immediate armistice, on condition 
that Victor Emmanuel should pledge himself to conclude a peace as 
soon as possible, to reduce his army to a peace footing, and to hand 
over the fortress of Alessandria to Austrian occupation as a hostage 
for his good faith. These terms, though far milder than had been 
offered to Charles Albert, were resented as dishonourable in Turin, 
and the young king had to enter his capital by night to avoid the 
risk of being insulted by his new subjects. Few men could have an- 
ticipated that a ruler whose reign began under such gloomy auspices 
would become before its close the recognised king of a free and 
united Italy. A revolt.in Lombardy, which had broken out directly 
hostilities commenced, was put down by the Austrians with prompt 
severity. Brescia, the only place which made a conspicuous re- 
sistance, was stormed by Haynau, whose conduct on this occasion 
earned him the name of the “ Hyena of Brescia,” and a reputa- 
tion for cruelty which was enhanced by his subsequent deeds in 
Hungary. The final treaty between Austria and Sardinia (August 6) 
restored matters to their condition before the war, the defeated 
country having to pay an idemnity of seventy-five million francs. 
§16. After their success in the north the Austrians proceeded to 
complete their work by putting down the revoluticn in the other 
provinces of Italy. Entering Tuscany, they occupied Florence, put 
down the Republic, and restored the authority of the grand duke. 
Leopold now returned from Gaeta, revoked the constitution which 
he had granted in the previous year, and restored the old system 
of absolute rule. Parma, Bologna, and Ancona were successively 
occupied by the Austrians, who would undoubtedly have advanced 
upon Rome if they had not been anticipated by the French. Gene- 
ral Oudinot, with 8000 men, landed at Civita Vecchia on April 5, 
and at once marched against the city. The republican leaders 
determined on a desperate resistance, and after seven hours’ fighting 
the assailants were driven back from the walls (80 April). But 
Oudinot received reinforcements, which enabled him to invest the 
city with 35,000 men, and, after resisting for a month, Rome was 
taken on July 38. Garibaldi, who had been the inspiring leader of 
the defence, escaped with his devoted followers to the mountains. 
Oudinot put an end to the Roman Republic by establishing a govern- 
ment in the pope’s name, but Pius IX. refused to trust himself to 
his foreign allies, and continued to reside at Gaeta. Venice was now 
completely isolated, but continued to make a heroic resistance until 
August 26, when it was compelled, partly by the bombardment 


A.D. 1848-1849. REACTION IN PRUSSIA. 701 


and partly by famine, to capitulate. Manin, the hero of the short- 
lived period of liberty, was allowed to retire into exile. 

Meanwhile the reaction in Naples and Sicily had been completed 
without foreign assistance. Jerdinand II., after recalling his troops 
from the war in Lombardy, had employed them in reducing the 
Sicilians to obedience. Messina was taken by storm (7 Sept., 1848), 
and the cruelties practised by the victors were so atrocious that 
Ferdinand received the nickname of King Bomba. The Neapolitan 
Parliament was continually prorogued, and was finally dissolved 
without ever having been allowed to méet. The Austrian victory 
of Novara encouraged the king to renew his attack upon Sicily. In 
April, 1849, Palermo was captured, and by the end of May the 
authority of the Neapolitan king was completely restored. 

§ 17. The suppression of disorder at Vienna after the capture of 
the city by Windischgritz led to a similar reaction in Prussia. A 
constituent assembly had been sitting in Berlin ever since May 22, 
1848, in which the democratic party sought to carry through its 
aims with the support of themob. In June the arsenal was sacked, 
and the assembly, instead of condemning the disturbances, took 
advantage of them to abolish the constitution granted by the king 
and to issue a more democratic one of their own. In August and 
September the populace was guilty of fresh outrages, which the 
government was unable to check. But the news from Vienna 
emboldened the king, Frederick William IV., to take decisive mea- 
sures. Count Brandenburg, a natural son of Frederick William II., 
was authorised to form a ministry, of which Manteuffel, minister 
of the interior, was the guiding spirit (4 Nov.). Four days later 
the constituent assembly was transferred from Berlin to the town of 
Brandenburg. When the democrats refused to obey, a considerable 
body of troops under Wrangel entered the capital and enforced com- 
pliance. Berlin was declared in a state of siege, all the inhabi- 
tants were disarmed, and the political clubs were dissolved. When 
the assembly resumed their meeting in Brandenburg (Nov. 27), 
the left. protested against the recent action of the government, 
and quitted the hall ina body. On December 5 the king decreed 
the dissolution of the assembly, and issued a new constitution 
which had been drawn up by the ministers. This established 
two chambers, chosen by indirect election. ‘The first election was 
ordered to take place in February, 1849. 

§ 18. While the states of Europe were convulsed with the storm 
of revolution, a grand national assembly at Frankfort was 
endeavouring to devise a constitution which should form Germany 
into a great and united state. This assembly, which may be called 
the German Parliament, to distinguish it from the Reichstag or 


702 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. XXxvL 


Bundestag, had been summoned by the Vorparlament, and was 
opened in the church of St. Paul on May 18, 1848. It contained 
at first 300 members, but their number was afterwards increased 
to 500. The Parliament failed to carry out its resolutions, but 
nevertheless it was a notable experiment, and a worthy exponent of 
the hopes and aspirations of the noblest minds of Germany. The 
great obstacle to its success was that it had nothing but moral force 
to rely upon; that it trusted to the enthusiasm of the people to 
triumph over the jealous interests of the princes and the deeply- 
rooted tendencies to disunion. From the first the assembly was 
divided into three fairly distinct parties. On the right the con- 
servatives, headed by von Radowitz and Vincke, wished to nego- 
tiate an agreement between the Parliament and the independent 
princes and governments of the separate states. On the left the 
cemocrats, led by Robert Blum of Leipzig, aimed at the establish- 
ment of a federal republic, and made up for their numerical 
weakness by stirring up the passions of the lower classes. The 
centre was the largest party, and comprised many of the most 
eminent men in Germany. Among its leaders were Gagern, 
Dahlmann, Gervinus, Arndt, Beseler, and Jacob Grimm. These 
men were the partisans of constitutional monarchy. They were 
imbued with the most ardent love of their country, but their 
want of practical experience in public business exposed them to the 
charge of being doctrinaires. 

The choice of the president, Gagern, gave evidence that the 
centre was likely to have the decisive voice. The first business was 
to establish an executive government to take the place of the effete 
and useless Bundestag. After a long discussion it was decided to 
choose a provisional administrator from among the younger mem- 
bers of the ruling families. The choice fell upon the archduke 
John, who had shown popular sympathies, and who, as a Hapsburg, 
was likely to be acceptable to the princes. The election was in- 
tended to be a temporary compromise. ‘I'he party of Gagern and 
Dahlmann was fully determined to entrust the headship of a new 
constitutional empire to the King of Prussia, and the weakness of 
Austria at this time made such a measure more than usually 
feasible. But at the moment Frederick William IV. was extremely 
unpopular in Germany, and it was necessary to gain time in order 
that this feeling might die away. On July 11 the administrator 
made his formal entry into Frankfort, and the Bundestag resigned 
its functions into his hands. He proceeded to nominate a ministry 
which should be responsible for all acts of the executive. From 
the first the weakness of the central government was obvious to all 
eyes. The Parliament ordered that all German troops should take 


A.D. 1848. THE GERMAN PARLIAMENT. 703 


an oath of fealty to the administrator. But the princes were by no 
means inclined to sacrifice one iota of their military independence, 
and in the larger states the order was simply disregarded. It was 
manifest that the central government existed only by the tolerance 
of the states, and that if they refused to obey there was no force 
which could compel their obedience. 

Before proceeding to draw up the new constitution, the Parlia- 
ment set itself to formulate “ the fundamental rights of the German 
people.” This was a grotesque error of tactics. The discussion of 
first principles naturally led to an endless discussion, and during 
the delay the princes were recovering strength. The first impulse 
of the revolutionary movement might have been strong enough to 
force a federal constitution upon Germany, but the TParliament 
foolishly allowed this impulse to spend itself and a reaction to set 
in before they entered upon their real task. And the discussion of 
the fundamental rights was not carried on without frequent inter- 
ruptions. Every movement in Berlin or Vienna, every detail of 
foreign politics, the great question of the non-German nationalities 
in Poland, Bohemia, Hungary and Bohemia, all gave rise to lengthy 
debates in the Parliament, though it was unable to exercise a 
practical influence on any one of them. Among the matters that 
excited the keenest interest in Frankfort was the war in Schleswig- 
Holstein, from which the Prussian troops had been withdrawn. 
The Parliament warmly espoused the cause of the duchies and of 
“the honour of Germany.” It decreed the formation of a federal 
army and fleet in order to carry on the war, even without the 
co-operation of Prussia. But meanwhile Frederick William IV. 
had opened negotiations with Denmark, which led to the conclusion 
of a truce at Malmé (26 August). By this it was agreed that 
Schleswig and Holstein should be subject toa common government 
of which half the members should be nominated by Prussia and 
half by Denmark; that all acts of the provisional government 
should be declared null, and that the Schleswig troops should be 
separated from those of Holstein. ‘The Parliament denounced this 
truce as dishonourable, but was ultimately compelled to confirm it. 
This proof of weakness gave an opportunity for the democratic 
party to show its discontent with the action of the majority, and 
especially with the appointment of the administrator. Riots broke 
out at Frankfort, and two deputies, Lichnowsky and Auerswald, 
were brutally murdered (18 September). But the Government 
showed unexpected energy. ‘The disorders were suppressed by the 
troops, and most of the democratic leaders quitted Frankfort. 

§ 19. By the end of 1848 the Parliament had drawn up the 
“ fundamental rights,” and published them as a Christmas present 


704 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. XXVI. 


to the nation. They were based on the prevailing liberal theories, 
and included legal equality for all men without regard to class 
privileges, the abolition of all feudal dues and burdens on the 
peasants, the freedom of the press, religious equality, trial by jury, 
the abolition of capital punishment, &c. The lesser states accepted 
them, the greater states took no notice, and they were soon for- 
gotten. The assembly now turned to the great question of the 
constitution. By far the most important problem was the relation 
of Austria to a German federation. In the early part of the year 
Austria, then in the thick of her difficulties, had been disregarded, 
but matters had been completely altered in October by the reduc- 
tion of Vienna to obedience. ‘The restoration of the Holy Roman 
Empire with a Hapsburg head was impossible, because Prussia 
would never submit to it. Equally impossible in the eyes of the 
assembly was a return to the old organisation of the Bund, which 
had completely proved its inefficiency. In these circumstances the 
Parliament had three alternatives to choose between. (1) Austria 
might be split up, and its German provinces might be united with 
the German federation. (2) The Austrian empire might be left as 
it stood, and be excluded from Germany altogether. (38) Even 
though this latter plan were carried out, some bond might be found 
to unite the Austrian empire with the German federation. This 
last was the plan adopted by Gagern and his immediate followers, 
who proposed to form two federations—a smaller, which should 
exclude, and a larger, which should include, Austria. But this 
proposal alienated a number of sincere patriots, who could not 
endure the formation of a united Germany to which any Germans 
were refused admission, On this question parties were completely 
readjusted in the Parliament. On the one side stood the ‘ Great 
Germans,” who would not hear of the exclusion of Austria; on the 
other the “ Little Germans,” who saw no chance of forming a 
permanent union of Germany except under the headship of Prussia, 
and who realised that the admission of Austria would be fatal to 
their scheme. The “ Great Germans” consisted not only of Aus- 
trian deputies, but of those from Bavaria and most of the South 
German states, which were hostile to Prussia on religious and 
political grounds. They had also the support of the democrats on 
the left, who did all in their power to frustrate the scheme of 
establishing a German monarchy. Gagern was at this time 
appointed minister by the Archduke John, and his place as president 
was taken by Simson, a deputy from Kénigsberg. 

Parties being so evenly divided on a question of vital importance, 
the work of framing the constitution proceeded slowly. It was 
decided that the executive government should have the conduct of 


A.D. 1849, THE GERMAN PARLIAMENT. 705 


foreign relations, the supreme control of the army, and the right 
of deciding peace or war. The legislature was to consist of two 
houses : a federal chamber (Statenhaus), based on the independence 
of the states; and a popular chamber ( Volkshaus), based upon the 
unity of the people. ‘I'he most obstinate discussions naturally arose 
about the form which the executive government should take. The 
extreme right proposed a simple return to the old Bundestag, the 
extreme left proposed to establish an elective presidency to which 
any adult German might aspire. Between these two schemes 
every conceivable variety of government was brought forward for 
discussion. Some wanted a “ directory” of princes, with Austria 
or Prussia as alternate presidents; others a triple executive, in which 
Bavaria should be associated with the two great powers. Austria 
demanded that there should be a directory of seven princes, with 
nine votes, Austria and Prussia having two votes each. Gradually 
the advantages of a single head were realised, but even then further 
difficulties arose. Should he be elective or hereditary ? should he 
bear the imperial or some other title? should the office pass in 
rotation among the great families ? The party of Gagern stood firm 
to their original programme, the appointment of a single hereditary 
emperor, and they carried the day. This pointed unmistakably 
to the election of the Prussian king, and the exclusion of Austria. 
The “Great German” party was so indignant at this that they 
alli:d themselves with the left to introduce democratic provisions 
into the. constitution, in the hope of thus ensuring its failure. In 
consequence of this alliance manhood suffrage was fixed for the 
popular. chamber, and the veto of the emperor was made suspen- 
sive instead of absolute. ‘The constitutional party realised that 
these articles threatened their scheme with shipwreck, but they 
could obtain no other terms. The constitution was carried as a whole 
in the second reading, and on April 3, 1849, a deputation appeared 
in Berlin to offer the hereditary empire to the king of Prussia. 

§ 20. The offer was sufficiently tempting, but Frederick William 
IV., made up his mind at the last moment to refuse it, and it must 
be confessed that he had ample reason for doing so. ‘The demo- 
cratic clauses which the left had tacked on to the constitution were 
distasteful to a prince who had had to contend with the populace 
in his own capital, and the crown. could not be accepted without 
the constitution. The whole work of the Parliament had originated 
with the revolution, and the king would receive no gift from such 
a source. His acceptance would probably have involved him in a 
war with Austria, in which he would have to face the hostility of 
all the Roman Catholic states of southern Germany. The decree 
of the Parliament had only been carried by a very small majority, 


706 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. XxvI. 


and the prospect of coercing unwilling subjects was not attractive. 
Moreover, flattering as the proposal was, there were many Prussians 
who were hostile to it, and who feared that the “rise of Prussia 
into Germany,” as it was termed, would involve the sinking of 
Prussian nationality and independence. And, finally, it is more 
than probable that the influence of the Czar, who regarded himself 
as the special protector of the Confederation of 1815, had not a 
little to do with Frederick William’s decision. 

The refusal of Prussia gave a great advantage to the democratic 
party at Frankfort, and this was increased by the withdrawal of 
the Austrian deputies (14 April). The administrator had at first 
determined to resign his office on the election of an emperor, but 
advice from Vienna decided him to retain it until a federation 
had been established which included Austria. The assembly was 
resolute in its adherence to the constitution, and appointed a 
committee of thirty to superintend the measures for carrying it 
out. ‘l'wenty-eight of the lexser states had already announced their 
adhesion, but the kings of Bavaria, Saxony, Hanover and Wurtem- 
berg held alvof. It was decided to force the hand of these princes 
by bringing pressure to bear upon them from their own subjects. 
But the kings met this by promptly dismissing their estates. In 
Prussia the lower chamber petitioned the king to accept the proposals 
from Frankfort, and was dissolved on April 27. But the Parliament 
refused to be daunted, and decreed on May 4 that all governments 
should be called upon to accept the constitution ; that if the king of 
Prussia refused the headship of the empire it should be conferred 
provisionally upon the next most powerful prince ; that the first 
diet, elected in the manner provided for, should meet on August 22. 

To enforce these decrees the now dominant left determined to 
employ the revolutionary methods which had been so potent in the 
previous year. A riot in Dresden compelled the king to fly to 
Konigstein, and a provisional government was erected. But the 
troops, with Prussian assistance, speedily got the better of the mob, 
and an attempted rising in Leipzig was also suppressed. More 
important were the revolutions in Baden and the Palatinate, but 
here also Prussia intervened with decisive effect. The Parliament 
was now completely discredited. The Prussian and Saxon deputies 
were withdrawn, and Gagern, finding himself in a hopeless minority, 
resigned office with his colleagues. The democrats, thus le{t to 
their own devices, passed futile protests against the action of 
Prussia, and took the revolutionary movement under their feeble 
protection. ‘Thinking Frankfort insecure, they transferred their 
session to Stuttgart (6 June); but when they endeavoured to 
excite a movement among the mob, the government of Wurtem- 


A.D. 1849-1850. AUSTRIA AND PRUSSIA. 707 


berg closed the hall against them, and the first German Parliament 
came to an end on June 18, 1849. It had failed lainentably to 
carry through the work it had undertaken; but it had played a 
conspicuous part in its earlier days, and it had given an impulse to 
German unity which was destined to take effect in later times. 

§ 21. As Austria was at this time occupied with the wars in 
Hungary and Italy, the restoration of order in Germany fell to 
Prussia, which thus obtained a commanding position. ITrederick 
William IV. had not refused the offer of the empire from any 
personal unwillingness or want of ambition; on the contrary, he 
was eager to become the head of Germany, if he could do so with 
the consent of the other governments, instead of being forced upon 
them by a revolutionary Assembly. On May 17, 1849, he opened 
a conference of princes at Berlin, before which he laid his plan of a 
confederation exclusive of Austria. Piussia was to be president of 
a college of princes with six votes, and a federal parliament was to 
be formed of two chambers. Bavaria withdrew from the meeting, 
but Hanover and Saxony ‘remained, and thus was formed the 
“league of the three kings” (Dreikénigsbund). The party of 
Gagern and Dahlmann held a meeting at Gotha (the Nachparla- 
ment) to express their approval of the Prussian plan. 

But Austria now succeeded in putting down the opposition in 
Italy and Hungary, and prepared to vindicate its position in 
Germany. Bavaria and Wurtemberg offered their mediation, and 
the Interim was arranged as a compromise between the two rival 
powers. This formed a commission, appointed by Austria and 
Prussia, into whose hands the administrator was to resign his 
functions, and which should act as a provisional government in 
Germany until May 1, 1850. The Prussian king met the emperor 
of Austria at Téplitz (7 Sept.), and accepted this agreement. But 
the rivalry of the two states continued uutil a permanent settle- 
ment could be arranged. The ‘“‘league of the three kings” was 
broken up by the secession of Hanover and Saxony, but Prussia 
adhered to its plan of forming a “Union” apart from Austria. 
The issue of a new Prussian constitution (6 Feb. 1850) conciliated 
the liberal party in Germany, while Austria relied upon the 
arbitrary tendencies of the princes. On March 20 the second 
German Parliament met at Erfurt, but it had none of the prestige 
or independence of its predecessor at Frankfort. It was completely 
subservient to Prussian influence, and sat only to confirm the 
projected “ Union,” which was now joined by Hesse-Cassel, Olden- 
burg, Baden, Weimar, and other lesser states. 

§ 22. But Austria refused to fall without a struggle from the 
leading position it had so long held in Germany, and could rely 


708 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. XXvVI. 


upen the unhesitating support of the four kingdoms and of Russia, 
which now began to exercise a great influence in German affairs. 
The ministry of Schwarzenberg took the bold step of summoning 
the old Bundestag to Frankfort, and the summons was obeyed by 
all the states which had not joined the “ Union.” Germany was 
thus divided into two hostile camps, and only a slight impulse was 
needed to bring about a civil war. This impulse was given by 
events in Hesse-Cassel, where the reactionary government of the 
minister Hassenpflug provoked a rebellion. The elector fled and 
appealed to the Bundestag, which promptly armed in his defence. 
But Hesse-Cassel was a member of the ‘‘ Union,” and. Prussia 
prepared troops to. resist any external intervention. For the 
moment a conflict seemed inevitable. But in Prussia a strong 
party had arisen under the leadership of Gerlach, Retzow, and 
Bismarck-Schénhausen, which disapproved of all the recent acts 
of the government, and wished to prevent the absorption of Prussia 
into Germany. Its organ, the Kreuz Zeitung, advocated a complete 
rupture with the Revolution, and an alliance of Prussia with the 
absolute. powers of Austria and Russia. The influence of this 
party, and the intervention of Russia, prevented Frederick William 
IV. from embarking in a war, the issue of which was more than 
doubtful. A conference at Olmiitz ended in the conclusion of a con- 
vention (29 Nov.), by which Prussia gave up the “ Union,” with- 
drew its protection from the movement in Hesse, and agreed to 
join a conference at Dresden for the settlement of German affairs. 
Count Brandenburg, who was ill, succumbed to the bitter humilia- 
tion, and Manteuffel, who became head of the ministry, allied 
himself closely with the Kreuz party. The rebellion in Hesse was 
put down by the troops of the Bund, the authority of the elector 
was restored, and Hassenpflug resumed the arbitrary rule which had 
provoked the outbreak. 

The conference of Dresden was opened under the presidency of 
Schwarzenberg on December 23, From the first it was evident 
that the influence of Russia would be decisive. The motives of the 
Czar’s policy were very simple. He wished to maintain the 
rivalry of Austria and Prussia, and, by supporting the lesser states, 
to prevent either of them from obtaining increased power. He 
demanded, therefore, the simple restoration of the old state of 
things before 1848. This was the net result of the conference, 
which was closed on May 15, 1850. On the same day a Prussian 
plenipotentiary joined the Bundestag at Frankfort. Thus the great 
movement ended in complete failure. Francis Joseph revoked 
the Austrian constitution (1 Jan., 1852). Frederick William IV., 
however, in spite of the influence of the Kreuz party, retained the 


A.D. 1850-1852. SCHLESWIG-HOLSTEIN. 709 


constitution of 1850, and thus Prussia stood ready to assume the 
headship of Germany under more favourable circumstances. 

§ 23. The intricate question of Schleswig-Holstein was still un- 
settled. In March, 1849, the Danish government declared the truce 
of Malmé (see p. 703) at an end and renewed the war. The German 
Bund sent 45,000 troops to the assistance of the duchies, and the 
Danes were defeated in several engagements. But a decisive Danish 
victory at Fredericia (6 July) compelled the acceptance of a truce 
by which Schleswig and Holstein were separated. ‘he latter duchy, 
as a member of the Bund, was to remain under the rule of the 
administrator, but Schleswig was to receive a Danish government, 
and the German troops were to be withdrawn. A year later this 
arrangement was confirmed by a definitive treaty between Den- 
mark and Prussia (2 July, 1850). ‘The duchies, however, refused 
to accept the treaty and continued the war on their own account. 
But they were defeated in one battle after another, and foreign 
intervention stepped in to put an end to the contest. At the 
conference of Olmiitz Austria and Prussia agreed to take joint 
measures to restore peace in Schleswig and Holstein. ‘Their troops 
marched into the duchies and compelled the cessation of hostili- 
ties. Ultimately the treaty of London (8 May, 1852), signed by 
England, Russia, Austria, France, Prussia, and Sweden, guaranteed 
the integrity of the Danish monarchy, the succession to which was 
promised to Christian of Gliicksburg and his male issue. The rights 
of the German Confederation in Holstein were left undisturbed, 
and the duke of Augustenburg, whose legal claim to the duchies 
was arbitrarily disregarded, was obliged to content himself with a 
pecuniary compensation. Frederick of Denmark granted his subjects 
a new constitution (Oct. 1855) and allowed Schleswig and Holstein 
to retain separate provincial estates. But he failed to conciliate the 
affection of his German subjects, and their discontent survived to be 
the source of future complications. 


III. THe Sreconp REPUBLIC AND THE SECOND EMPIRE IN FRANCE. 


§ 24. After the suppression of the socialist rising of June, 1848, 
Cavaignac had carried on the government of France with almost 
perfect tranquillity. The assembly proceeded with its work of 
drawing up a constitution for the Republic. The legislative power 
was entrusted to a single chamber of 750 members chosen by 
manhood suffrage. All parties agreed to place the executive power 
in the hands of a President, the royalists because the office resembled 
a monarchy, the republicans in imitation of the constitution of 
America. ‘he chief discussion arose on the question whether the 


710 - MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. XxvI. 


President should be chosen by the assembly or by the nation, but 
ultimately it was decided that he should be elected by universal 
suffrage for four years. The subordination of the President to the 
assembly was strongly asserted, but no means were suggested for 
enforcing it. It was a hazardous experiment to create two powers 
both having an independent origin, without any provision to avert a 
dead-lock between them. But for the moment future dangers were 
forgotten and men’s minds were absorbed in the approaching election, 
which was fixed for December 10. The republican candidate was 
Cavaignac, who had given conclusive proofs of his honesty and of his 
ability to rule. But he had alienated the socialists by his conduct 
in the June rising; he was regarded with jealousy by many of his 
fellow-officers ; and his very devotion to the Republic told against 
him among those who cared less for democratic equality than for 
the protection of tneir property. His most formidable rival was 
Louis Napoleon, who had been elected in September by five de- 
partments. ‘l'his time no opposition was made to his return to 
France, and he took his seat as deputy for the department of the 
Seine. Little was known of him but the futile conspiracies of 
Strasburg and Boulogne, but his name was a charm to conjnre with. 
Thanks to Thiers and other writers, the memory of the first 
Napoleon had come to be almost worshipped in France. The 
peasants and soldiers believed that the rule of another Napoleon 
would secure their prosperity and their glory. The Orleanists also 
supported him, in the belief that they could use him as their 
instrument to effect the restoration of the July monarchy, but events 
proved that their confidence in his incapacity was_ ill-founded. 
Among the other candidates were Ledru-Rollin, Raspail, the cham- 
pion of the advanced socialists, and Lamartine, whose popularity had 
declined as rapidly as it had arisen. From the first commencement 
of the voting, the result was a foregone conclusion. The recorded 
votes numbered nearly seven millions and a half. Of these 
Louis Napoleon received 5,434,226, and Cavaignac only 1,443,107. 
Ledru-Rollin came next with 370,119, and the other candidates 
received hardly any support. On December 20 the President took 
the prescribed oath to observe the constitution, and entered upon 
his official residence in the palace of the Elysée. 

§ 25. From the first Louis Napoleon made it his aim to abolish 
the republic and to revive the empire. In complete contrast to 
Louis Philippe, who had relied upon the middle class, he sought 
support from the peasants, the army, and the priests. The expedi- 
tion to Rome under Oudinot was intended as a bribe to the soldiers 
and the church. The constituent assembly, having completed its 
work, was dissolved, and a new legislative assembly met in Paris 


A.D. 1848-1851. THE FRENCH REPUBLIC. 711 


on May 26, 1849. The elections gave evidence that the republicans 
had lost the confidence of the people. Neither Lamartine, Dupont 
de l’Eure, Garnier Pagés, Flocon. nor Marie obtained seats. The 
opposition consisted of about 120 extreme democrats under the 
lead of Ledru-Rollin, and they revived the old revolutionary title 
of the “ Mountain.” The failure of Oudinot’s first attack on Rome 
gave occasion for a rising in Paris in June. But the troops under 
Changarnier speedily put down disorder, and the movement of 
reaction was strengthened. Ledru-Rollin fled to London. Several 
of the republican journals were suppressed, and a new law was in- 
troducrd to shackle the press. In October the President dismissed 
his ministers, who were too constitutional for his tastes, and filled 
their places with more obscure but more docile instruments. 

To a certain extent the President and the majority of the 
assembly pursued common objects. Both were hostile to the 
republic, but while the latter wished to restore a constitutional 
monarchy, Louis Napoleon scarcely troubled to conceal his despotic 
inclinations. As lony as they could work together, the progress of 
reaction was rapid. ‘The parti de ordre, headed by Thiers, Broglie, 
Molé, and Montalembert, determined to avert the dangers threa- 
tened by universal suffrage. After a stormy debate, in which Thiers 
excited the fury of the “ Mountain” by speaking of “ Ja vile multi- 
tude,’ they carried their proposal restricting the suffrage to citi- 
zens domiciled for three consecutive years in the same commune 
(May 30, 1850). ‘To simplify press prosecutions, it was decreed 
that all articles should be signed by the writers. A number of 
eminent professors were removed from the university on account 
of their republican opinions. 

As the period of his presidency was running out, and the 
constitution prohibited his re-election, it became necessary for Louis 
Napoleon to take active measures to secure his power. He was 
always discussing schemes with his associates, but could never 
make up his mind as to the exact moment for executing them. 
As his designs became more and more apparent, the assembly 
began to show distrust and hostility. In January, 1851, General 
Changarnier was dismissed from the command of the Paris garrison 
and the national guard, apparently because his regiments had not 
raised the cry of Vive TEmpereur / at the recent reviews. The 
assembly declared its confidence in the general and its want of 
confidence in the ministry. This compeiled the retirement of the 
ministers, but their successors were equally docile to the president, 
and equally unacceptable to the legislature. Petitions, got up by 
Napoleon’s agents, poured in from the provinces to demand a 
revision of the constitution, but the requisite majority uf votes in 


712 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. XXVI. 


the assembly could not be obtained, and the project was dropped. 
Napoleon now determined to throw himself upon the support of 
the people. The assembly had made itself very unpopular by the 
law of May 30, 1850, which had reduced the number of electors by 
three millions. The ministers proposed the repeal of the law, but 
the majority refused to give up their measure. Thus the President 
posed as the champion of democratic liberties against an oligarchi- 
cal and reactionary assembly. At last Louis Napoleon considered 
that his time had come, and fixed December 2, the anniversary of 
Austerlitz, as the date for the long-meditated coup d’état. 

§ 26. The necessary preparations had been carefully made by 
Napoleon’s agents, M. de Morny, Generals St. Arnaud and Magnan, 
and M. de Maupas, the prefect of police. On the night of the first, 
while suspicions were lulled by a grand party at the Elysée, the 
troops were distributed, and the necessary placards and proclama- 
tions were printed at the government press. The first blow was 
struck by the imprisonment of the most dangerous opponents. 
Generals Cavaignac, Changarnier, Lamoriciére, Bedeau, together 
with Thiers, Victor Hugo, and Eugéne Sue, were simultaneously 
seized in the middle of the night and dispersed to different prisons. 
In the morning proclamations appeared in all the streets announc- 
ing that the National Assembly was dissolved, that a new election 
was to take place on December 14, that universal suffrage was 
restored, and that Paris and the department of the Seine were in 
a state of siege. A new ministry was announced, in which Morny 
was minister of the interior; St. Arnaud, of war; M. Rouher, of 
justice, and M. Fould, of finance. In an “appeal to the people” 
Louis Napoleon proposed that the executive head of the government 
should be chosen for ten years, and that a Council of State, a Senate, 
and a Legislative Assembly should be created on the model of his 
uncle’s constitution of the 18th Brumaire. Meanwhile, about 250 
deputies met in the Palais Bourbon, and were preparing a protest 
against the action of the president, when the hall was surrounded 
by troops, and they found themselves prisoners. By this act the 
opposition was deprived of any common centre of union. Isolated 
revolts took place on the next two days, and the usual barricades 
were erected, but the troops gained an easy victory, though not 
without considerable bloodshed. By the evening of the 4th the 
success of the coup d’état was secured. The plébiscite was commenced 
on December 20, and resulted in an enormous majority in favour 
of the new constitution. The number of recorded votes was 
7,439,216 to 646,757. The result of this vote was that Napoleon 
became President for ten years, and the ee iaisadgab vt 
upon his power were removed. 


A.D. 1851—1852. THE SECOND EMPIRE. 713 


. Like all restored princes, Louis Napoleon was an imitator. On 
December 2 he had closely copied the 18th Brumaire ; his constitution, 
which was formally issued on January 15, returned to the system of 
the first Napoleon; the uncle had been Consul, the nephew was 
President. ‘To complete the external parallel, it was only necessary 
to get rid of the republican title by reviving the empire, and it was 
certain that this would not long be delayed. ‘The gilt eagles were re- 
stored to the standards; Napoleon’s name was substituted for that 
of the Republic in the public prayers; the national guard was re- 
constituted ; the President took up his residence in the Tuileries. In 
the autumn Louis Napoleon made a grand tour through the provinces 
and was everywhere received with shouts of Vivel’Hmpereur! The 
same cry was raised by the troops on his return to the capital. The 
senate was directed to discuss the matter, and it was decided once 
more to have recourse to a plébiscite. ‘The proposal was that Louis 
Napoleon should be chosen hereditary emperor of the French, with 
the right of settling the succession among the members of his 
family. It was carried without discussion by 7,824,129, to 253,145. 
So far universal suffrage had shown itself sufficiently favourable to 
despotism. On December 2, 1852, the new Emperor was proclaimed 
as Napoleon IIT. 

§ 27. The empire was accepted in Europe without hostility, but 
without enthusiasm. The governments which had just recovered 
from the shock of 1848 welcomed it as a defeat of the revolution. 
The Czar, the patron of legitimacy, was as usual the last to acknow- 
ledge the new government of France. In France itself the coup 
d état had annihilated all opposition. The educated classes were 
hostile to despotism, but they were overawed by a system of 
espionage that made the utterance of heedless words a crime. A 
xreat revival of material prosperity followed the restoration of order, 
and the ardent pursuit of money-making proved an excellent salve 
for political discontent. The constitution of January, 1852, was 
renewed with a few modifications, which increased the power of 
the emperor, and further humiliated the corps législatif. To fuse 
the two branches of the house of Bourbon, the Comte de Chambord 
(Henry V.) adopted the Comte de Paris; but the royalists continued 
to be harmless, and the people resented the treatment ef the French 
crown as the property of a family. The government adopted the 
economical fallacy that unproductive expenditure is beneficial to 
the labourers. Great part of Paris was pulled down to make room 
for more magnificent buildings. The Rue de Rivoli was extended 
almost to the Faubourg St. Antoine, and thus was demolished the 
labyrinth of lanes which formerly surrounded the Hétel de Ville, 
and made it always liable to a surprise. The court was revived on 

32 


714 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP, XXvL 


the most magnificent scale, and the expenditure on pomp and 
festivities was enormously increased after the emperor’s marriage. 
The first duty of the founder of a new dynasty was to marry. 
Napoleon began by looking round for a princess; but he found the 
established dynasties so cool in response to his overtures that he 
determined to conciliate democratic prejudices by an alliance with a 
subject. His choice fell upon Donna Eugenia di Montijo, the widow 
of a Spanish general who had fought under Napoleon I., and the 
marriage was solemnised in January, 1853. The empress Hugénie 
became the model for fashionable ladies, and her example did much 
to encourage that lavish extravagance which distinguished and at 
last discredited the second empire. 

France was once more subject to the absolute rule of an indi- 
vidual, and the character of that individual was one of the riddles 
of the age. Napoleon’s personal courage was indisputable, but it 
was combined with invincible procrastination. No advice could 
turn him from his purpose, but no one could predict the moment 
when he would carry it out. He could not endure opposition, and 
he surrounded himself with clerks rather than with ministers. 
Men like Guizot and Thiers refused to serve hitn, and he could 
never have tolerated their superiority. His early training had 
been that of a conspirator, and a conspirator he remained when he 
had attained the throne. There is little doubt that in his youth he 
had been mixed up in the plots of secret societies, and the associa- 
tions then formed never ceased to hamper him. He was always 
afraid that any treachery to his old allies would lead to his assassi- 
nation, and this fear had much to do with directing his policy 
towards Italy. He was a socialist in possession of absolute power, 
but he had to conciliate the established dynasties, which hated 
and dreaded socialism. Hence the apparent vacillation of his 
policy and the secrecy which always shrouded his designs. He 
was naturally indolent and averse to business; he would trust no 
one to do his work for him, and thus his administration was always 
defective. His ability was considerable, but it was the ability of 
an imitator. He had none of the original genius of his great uncle, 
and none of his power of choosing the best instruments. Nothing 
but the excessive dread of a new revolution could have kept him in 
power so long. The domestic history of France is almost a blank 
in his reign. To divert men’s minds from the degradation and 
corruption of his rule, he adopted a vigorous foreign policy and 
became the firebrand of Europe. The French had been so accus- 
tomed to excitement for the last few years that they could not live 
without it. Napoleon fully comprehended this, and bribed his sub- 
jects with magnificent fétes at home, and aggressive wars abroad. 


A.D. 1852-1854. NAPOLEON IIL 715 


It was generally expected at first that he would take the earliest 
opportunity to quarrel with England and to avenge the defeat of 
Waterloo. But an English war would have ruined the material 
prosperity of France, and a dispute about the Holy Places in 
Palestine offered the more congenial prospect of a contest with the 
northern despot who had been so contemptuously tardy in acknow- 
ledying the empire. When the Crimean war was over, the 
emperor turned his attention to Italy. It was this determination 
to distract the attention of the French that involved him in the 
war with Prussia which ultimately ruined his dynasty. The 
history of France under Napoleon III., as under Napoleon IJ., is the 
history of every country in Europe except France. 


716 MODERN EUROPE. 


CHAPTER XXVII. 


THE UNION OF ITALY AND GERMANY. 


§ 1. The reaction in Italy ; Victor Emmanuel maintains the constitution ; 
reforms in Piedmont; ministry of Cavour; Sardinian troops in the 
Crimea; the Congress of Paris. § 2. Orsini’s attentat; relations of 
France with England and Italy; the interview at Plombiéres ; 
secret treaty with France. § 3. Austria provokes the war; campaign 
of 1859; battles of Magenta and Solferino; overthrow of the rulers 
of Tuscany, Parma, Modena, and Bologna; peace of Villafranca; 
Napoleon III.’s motives. § 4. Victor Emmanuel accepts Lombardy ; 
the central provinces; their union with Sardinia; cession of Savoy 
and Nice. § 5. Garibaldi in Sicily and Naples; Victor Emmanuel at 
war with the papacy; campaign of Castel Fidardo; annexation of 
Umbria, the Marches, Naples and Sicily; the Italian Parliament ; 
death of Cavour. § 6. Italy after Cavour’s death; Aspromonte; the 
September convention with France; transference of the capital from 
Turin to Florence. § 7. Austria and Prussia from 1852 to 1863. 
§ 8. The Schleswig - Holstein question; Denmark and the Bund; 
intervention of Austria and Prussia; conquest of Schleswig; the 
London conference; the treaty of Vienna; the convention of Gastein. 
§ 9. Hostile preparations; the Seven Weeks’ war; preliminaries of 
Nikolsburg; treaty of Prague; territorial acquisitions of Prussia. 
§ 10. The North German Confederation; treaties between Prussia 
and the south German states; new constitution for Austro-Hungary. 
§ 11. The war in Italy; battle of Custozza; annexation of Venetia; 
evacuation of Rome by the French; defeat of Garibaldi at Mentana; 
the French occupation of Rome is resumed. § 12. Attitude of Napo 
Jeon Il.; the Mexican expedition; the affair of Luxemburg; hostility 
to Prussia. §13. Revolution in Spain; expulsion of Isabella; the 
Hohenzollern candidature; French demands; France declares war 
against Prussia. § 14. The campaign from Saarbriick to Sedan; 
Napoleon a prisoner; yevolution in Paris; the Third Republic. 
§ 15. The siege of Paris; war in the provinces ; armistice of Versailles ; 
the national assembly at Bordeaux; the treaty of Frankfort ; France 
after the war. § 16. The German Empire. § 17. Annexation of 
Rome to Italy; second transfer of the capital; death of Victor 
Emmanuel. § 18. Amadeus of Aosta elected king of Spain; his 
resignation; the Spanish Republic; accession of Alfonso XII. 


§ 1. THe triumph of the reaction had been more complete in Italy 
than in any other country. Even a moderate ruler like Leopold 
of Tuscany gave himself up to the current. Pius IX., who 
returned to Rome on April 14, 1850, abandoned all the reforms 


A.D. 1850-1855. VICTOR EMMANUEL I. G17 


of his earlier years, and refused to listen to the advice of France, 
although French troops still garrisoned the city and maintained 
his power. The worst ruler of all was Ferdinand II. of Naples 
and Sicily, whose cruelties exasperated his subjects and dis- 
custed every right-thinking man in Europe. In: every court the 
influence of Austria was exerted to repress all aspirations towards 
freedom or union. The only country in which constitutional 
liberties were preserved was Piedmont. Victor Emmanuel had set 
himself from the first to achieve the object of his father and to free 
Italy from foreign rule. ‘To do this he must inspire the Italians 
with confidence by making Piedmont the model of a constitutional 
monarchy. It was in vain that Radetsky offered him the assistance 
of “‘ forty thousand bayonets” to establish despotism. His attach- 
ment to the Statuto was due to policy rather than to principle, but 
the honesty with which he held to his plighted word stood out in 
conspicuous contrast to the conduct of other princes, and earned 
for him the glorious title of “ 7d ré galantuomo.” 

While the other Italian states were groaning under the abuses 
of absolute rule, Piedmont entered upon the path of administrative 
reforms. The Siccardi laws, which were carried in 1850, abolished 
the foro ecclesiastico, i.e. the exclusive jurisdiction of the church in 
matters concerning the church and in cases of heresy, sacrilege and 
blasphemy. This measure provoked the violent hostility of the pope, 
but Victor Emmanuel, although the son of Charles Albert and him- 
self endowed with a superstitious temperament, braved the storm 
with a courage which conclusively proved his devotion to the 
cause of civil liberty. It was at this juncture that a place in the 
ministry was given to count Camillo Cavour, who was destined to 
do more than any other man for the cause of Italy. The key- 
stone of Cavour’s policy was a conviction that the freedom of Italy 
could only be achieved with external assistance. He made it his 
object to obtain for Piedmont the respect and the friendship of 
the European powers, and he sternly repressed the revolutionary 
projects of Mazzini and his associates, which alienated all upholders 
of orderly government. In 1852, Cavour became prime minister, 
and before long an opportunity offered itself for carrying out his 
designs. When the Crimean war broke out, Sardinia offered its 
ailiance to England and France. ‘This step provoked the most 
active opposition. Its advantages were distant and doubtful, while 
it was easy to prove that Sardinia had no interests involved in the 
struggle, and no motive for incurring the hostility of Russia. But 
the suppert of the king enabled Cavour to carry his point, the 
treaty of Turin was signed (Jan. 10, 1855), and a Sardinian 
detachment of 18,000 men was sent to the Crimea. No promise of 


718 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. XXvir. 


assistance was made by the allies, but a great step had been taken 
towards enlisting the sympathies of France and England in an 
eventual contest of Italy against Austria. The Sardinian troops, 
which were commanded by La Marmora, did not play any great 
part in the war. Their only success was gained in the compara- 
tively unimportant battle of the Tschernaya. But there can be no 
doubt that Sardinia had risen greatly in the public opinion both of 
Italy and of Europe. At the Congress of Paris Cavour appeared 
on an equal footing with the plenipotentiaries of the great powers, 
and adroitly seized the opportunity to represent the evils which 
Italy suffered from foreign occupation. 

§ 2. From this time Sardinia was practically recognised by all 
Italians as the representative and leader of the national cause. A 
subscription was raised in the chief towns of the peninsula to assist 
in the fortification of Alessandria. Austria was bitterly exasperated, 
and the Austrian minister was recalled from Turin. It was evident 
that the struggle could not be long delayed. Sardinia could not 
hope to contend single-handed with Austria, and relied for assistance 
upon the sympathies of Napoleon III. So far no tangible results 
had been obtained from the French alliance, and at this crisis an 
event occurred which almost broke it off altogether. On Jan. 14, 
1858, Orsini, a member of the secret society of the Carbonari, 
attempted to assassinate the French emperor by throwing bombs 
under his carriage as he was going to the opera. ‘The emperor him- 
self escaped unhurt, but nearly 150 of the bystanders were either 
killed or wounded by the explosion. A very stringent “law of 
public safety ” was adopted in France, which placed the persons and 
property of all suspected persons at the mercy of the government. 
But the most important result of the attentat was the sudden 
change of relations with England and Piedmont. Both countries 
were denounced as harbouring and protecting assassins. With 
England the quarrel becameaserious one. The Moniteur published 
addresses from tbe French colonels to the emperor, which contained 
the most offensive references to England, and excited a storm of 
indignation in this country; the volunteer force was organised, 
Palmerston’s ministry had to resign, and the government of Lord 
Derby showed a manifest inclination to support Austria against 
French designs in Italy. 

The relations between France and Italy were naturally affected 
by the attentat. Orsini was an Italian and belonged to an Italian 
society. The reactionary and clerical part’es in France tried to 
utilise the occasion to detach Napoleon III. from his connection with 
Italy. Walewski, the French foreign miuister, called upon the 
government of ‘lurin to introduce modifications into the laws, in 


A.D. 1855-1859. NAPOLEON III. IN ITALY. 719 


order to protect foreign rulers against the plots of assassins, and to 
satisfy public opinion in France. But Victor Emmanuel refused 
to alter the constitution at the dictation of a foreign power. ‘The 
only concession he would make was the passing ofa law prohibiting 
the publication in Sardinia of articles which tended to provoke re- 
bellion against friendly governments. In the end the act of Orsini 
rather helped than thwarted the aspirations of Italy. The motive 
for the plot was that Napoleon had broken his solemn pledges to the 
Italian patriots. He could not disarm the assassin more effectually 
than by giving some signal proof that he was still devoted to the 
cause which he had adopted in his youth. In July he had an inter- 
view at Plombiéres with Cavour at which it was secretly arranged 
that France would support Sardinia in case of a war with Austria. 
This was followed by the conclusion of a secret treaty, which con- 
firmed the arrangement of Plombiéres, and agreed that Lombardy 
and Venetia should be annexed to Sardinia to form a Kingdom of 
Northern Italy. In return for these concessions, Victor Emmanuel 
pledged himself to cede Savoy and Nice to France. 

§ 3. The neutral powers did all they could to avert the 
approaching war, and proposed that the grievances of Italy should 
be submitted toa Congress. Cavour had to exert all his diplomatic 
abilities to prevent a compromise, and at the same time to disguise 
any apparent desire for war. The assistance of France could not be 
looked for unless Austria could be represented as the aggressor. 
Fortunately, the government at Vienna stepped in to assist its 
enemies. Austria refused to allow that Sardinia should be repre- 
sented at a Congress to settle the affairs of Italy, and finally sent 
an ultimatum to Turin demanding disarmament within three days 
under penalty of immediate war. This was exactly what Cavour 
was waiting for. He refused the demand, and the Austrian army, 
200,000 strong, at once crossed the Ticino (May 27) and occupied 
Novara and Vercelli. Had they marched straight upon Turin, they 
could have seized the city long before the arrival of aid from France. 
But the Austrian commanders showed signal incompetence through- 
out the campaign, and the opportunity was lost. Napoleon III. lost 
no time in fulfilling his obligations to his ally, and assumed the 
command of the French army in person. On May 13 he landed at 
Genoa and was there joined by Victor Emmanuel. The Sardinian 
troops were to act as the auxiliaries of the French, and a body of 
volunteers, the famous “ hunters of the Alps,” was organised under 
the command of Garibaldi to harass the Austrians in the broken 
country at the foot of the Alps. The campaign was short and de- 
cisive. No conspicuous generalship was shown on either side, but 
the superior fighting power of the French gave them the victory. 


720 MODERN EUROPE. CHap. xxvi. 


The battle of Magenta (June 4), at which MacMahon won the mar- 
shal’s baton, gave Milan to the allies, and forced the Austrians to 
retire upon the Quadrilateral. Francis Joseph now assumed the 
command at Verona, and at Solferino (June 24) the three sovereigns 
all appeared upon the field. It was a soldiers’ battle, and after 
ten hours’ obstinate fighting, in which both sides suffered enormous 
losses, the Austrians were again completely defeated. 

The rapid success of the allies had roused the utmost enthusiasm 
in Italy. Leopold II. of Tuscany fled to the Austrian camp, and a 
provisional government was erected in Florence. Parma, Modena, 
and Bologna were deserted by their rulers. From all these states 
envoys appeared to offer the sovereignty to Victor Emmanuel. The 
question of annexation was deferred until after the conclusion of 
peace, but in the meanwhile the king sent commissioners to under- 
take a provisional regency in his name. . 

At this moment, when the freedom of northern and central Italy 
seemed assured, and the allies were preparing for the conquest of 
Venetia, the news fell like a thunderbolt upon the Italian patriots 
that Napoleon III. had granted an armistice to the Austrians and 
had concluded the preliminaries of a peace at Villafranca (July 12). 
By this arrangement Lombardy was to be ceded to Sardinia; 
Austria was to retain Venetia and the Quadrilateral; the old rulers 
were to be restored in Tuscany, Modena, Parma, and the Roman 
Legations, and Italy was to be organised as a federation under the 
honorary presidency of the pope. The final settlement was to be 
agreed upon in a conference at Zurich of plenipotentaries from 
Austria, France, and Sardinia. Napoleon’s motives for thus 
breaking his promises were eagerly debated at the time, but are 
now tolerably clear. He was carrying on the war not only for Italy 
but also for France. French public opinion, which he could not 
afford to disregard, was ready to welcome any weakening of Austria, 
but looked with fear and suspicion upon the erection of a strong 
and united state in Italy. It was obvious that the victories of the 
allies would give to Sardinia, not only Lombardy and Venetia, but 
the whole of central Italy, and this was more than Napoleon had 
contemplated at Plombieres. Moreover, the annexation of the 
Legations would bring him into collision with the papacy, aad the 
empire was not strong enough to dispense with the support of the 
priests. Personal motives had also great weight with him. He 
had done enough for fame, but he was conscious that his victories 
were not due to his own generalship, and that an attack on the 
Quadrilateral would be difticult and probably dangerous. 

§ 4. Victor Emmanuel was bitterly disappointed by the sud- 
den blow to his hopes. Cavour urged him to repudiate the treaty, to 


A.D. 1859-1860. CAVOUR. 721 


refuse the cession of Lombardy, and to throw the whole responsibility 
of the measure upon Napoleon II]. But the king was too prudent 
to take this advice, and Cavour resigned, his place being taken by 
Rattazzi. Victor Emmanuel accepted the treaty of Villafranca 
“ pour ce qui me concerne,” and obtained a promise from the emperor 
that he would not tolerate any forcible restoration of the rulers of 
Tuscany, Parma, Modena, and the Legations. It was certain that 
the people would not do it of their own accord, especially while 
they were assured of the sympathy and moral support of Piedmont. 
The Sardinian commissioners were recalled, but their place was 
taken by provisional governments. Parma and Modena were united 
into a single state under the name of Emilia. In complete 
disregard of the treaty of Villafranca, which was confirmed by the 
conference of Zurich, representative assemblies were summoned, 
and voted for the annexation of their respective provinces to the 
Sardinian monarchy. Victor Emmanuel received their envoys 
graciously, and promised to do all in his power to obtain the 
approval of Europe for their wishes. Jt was suggested that a 
European congress should meet to discuss the question. The pro- 
posal came to nothing, but it served to reconcile Victor Emmanuel 
and Cavour. The latter was the only man who could be trusted to 
represent the Italian cause among the diplomatists of Europe. In 
January, 1860, Rattazzi resigned and Cavour was entrusted with 
the formation of a new ministry. Great exertions were made to 
induce the pope to listen to the demands of his subjects. But 
Pius IX. would not hear of any diminution of his temporal power, 
and it was evident that Victor Emmanuel must again risk a quarrel 
with the papacy. ‘l'o conciliate the French emperor, Cavour deter- 
mined that the wishes of the central provinces should be expressed 
by a plébiscite. The result was a foregone conclusion, and in 
March, 1860, Tuscany, Emilia, and Romagna were formally an- 
nexed to Sardinia. In the next month a parliament met in which 
the new provinces were represented, and the annexation was enthu- 
siastically confirmed. The deposed princes issued futile protests, 
and the pope resorted to his last weapon of excommunication. 
Napoleon III. discovered that it was easier to excite a storm than 
to allay it. In France the recent expedition was attacked as a 
quixotic enterprise in which French interests had been sacrificed 
to the aggrandisement of Sardinia, To satisfy his subjects, the 
emperor now demanded the cession of Savoy and Nice, which had 
hitherto been dropped because its condition, the annexation of 
Venetia with Lombardy, had not been fulfilled. It was hard for 
Victor Emmanuel to give up the country which had been the cradle 
of his race, shat political interests were imperative. By Cavour’s 
32 


722 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. XXvIL. 


advice he consented to the sacrifice on condition that the approval 
should be obtained both of the Savoyards and of the Italian parlia- 
ment. In the latter a violent debate took place : Garibaldi had been 
born in Nice, and expressed bitter resentment at its annexation by 
a foreign ruler. But the majority of Italians cared little for Savoy, 
which really stood outside the peninsula, and had nosympathy with 
the national cause. The annexation was approved by 229 votes to 
233. Thus the last step was taken in the long process by which 
the house of Savoy was transformed into a purely Italian dynasty. 

§ 2. The monarchy of Victor Emmanuel now included the whole 
of Italy with the exception of three provinces, Venetia, the remain- 
ing Papal States, and the Two Sicilies. In the latter kingdom the 
brutal Ferdinand II. (Bomba) had been succeeded in 1859 by his 
sop, Francis IJ. Overtures had been made tothe new king from 
Turin, proposing the formation of a constitutional monarchy in 
southern Italy which should co-operate with Sardinia in supporting 
the national cause against the foreigner. But Francis II. refused 
to alter the system of government bequeathed by his father, and 
clung obstinately to the Austrian alliance. Under these circum- 
stances a contest between the north and south was inevitable. But 
Victor Emmanuel could not venture on another war for his own 
agorandisement without alienating Europe and risking a quarrel 
with France. A solution of the difficulty was offered by an in- 
dependent adventurer, whose zeal for the cause of Italy was not 
affected by any regard for the scruples of kings and _ princes. 
Garibaldi, indignant at the unpatriotic sacrifice of Nice, was eager 
to find a new field of action, and determined to offer himself as a 
champion to the oppressed subjects of the house of Bourbon. Collect- 
ing a “ thousand ” volunteers at Genoa, he sailed to Sicily and 
landed near Marsala (May 14, 1860). Within two months the whole 
island had been secured by the reduction of Palermo (June 6) and 
Messina (June 25). Garibaldi became an almost mythical hero, 
and his fame began to overshadow that of Victor Emmanuel and 
Cavour. Francis [. now hastened to announce his intention of 
cranting a constitution and allying himself with Sardinia. But it 
was too late to win the confidence of a people that had so often 
suffered from the perfidy of their rulers, Garibaldi crossed over 
to the mainland, met with absolutely no resistance, and entered 
Naples in triumph (Sept. 7). Francis II. retired with 20,000 troops 
to Gaeta, while another part of his army occupied Capua. 

Meinwhile Pius [X. had commenced a crusade for the recovery 
of the Legations, and entrusted the command of his army to the 
French general Lamoriciére. The government of Turin demanded 
the disarmament of this force, and on the pope’s refusal an army 


A.D. 1860-1861. GARIBALDI IN NAPLES. 723 


under Cialdini entered Umbria. At Castel Fidardo the papal army, 
a disorganised rabble of different nationalities, was utterly routed 
(Sept. 14). Lamoriciére had to surrender in Ancona and was sent 
back to France. Austria, Russia, Prussia and France, expressed 
their disapproval of the invasion of papal territory by recalling their 
ambassadors from Turin. But Victor Emmanuel, having made up 
his mind to brave the perils of excommunication, was not much 
impressed with this diplomatic protest. He followed his army to 
Ancona and proceeded thence into Naples. An attack upon Rome 
or the surrounding Patrimony of St. Peter would have brought 
the Sardinians into collision with the French garrison, and would 
certainly have roused the hostility of Napoleon ITI. 

The rapid success of Garibaldi involved an unexpected danger for 
Sardinia. He had not been in any formal connection with the 
court of Turin, and had in fact conquered Naples against its will. 
Instead of annexing his conquest to Victor Emmanuel’s kingdom, 
he assumed the title of Dictator, and went so far as to demand the 
dismissal of Cavour. Mazzini urged him to form a Republic of 
Naples, and such an act must have retarded, if it did not prevent, 
the union of Italy. But Cavour acted with politic decision. 
Representing to the French Emperor that his action was necessary 
to thwart the revolutionary party, he assembled the parliament 
and obtained from it a decree authorising the annexation of the 
conquered papal provinces and the Two Sicilies. Garibaldi found 
it necessary to play a more humble part than had been suggested 
to him. He was still engaged in besieging Capua, when the 
arrival of the Sardinian army compelled the capitulation of the 
fortress. He laid down his temporary dictatorship, acknowledged 
the authority of Victor Emmanuel, and retired covered with glory 
to his island home at Caprera. The siege of Gaeta was now 
commenced in form by Cialdini. For some time the presence of 
the French fleet prevented any attack by sea, but at last, on 
February 16, 1861, Francis 11. had to surrender, and sought refuge 
in Rome. A real Italian kingdom had now been formed by the 
addition of Umbria, the Marches and the Two Sicilies. Nearly 
23,000,900 subjects acknowledged the rule of Victor Emmanuel. 
There were difficulties and dangers to be confronted in the future. 
National unity could not be created all at once. The population 
of the south had had no training to fit them for the enjoyment 
of constitutional liberties, and some time must elapse before Naples 
could stand on the same political level as Piedmont or Tuscany. 
The Austrians still held Venetia, and would seize the first oppor- 
tunity to recover their lost supremacy. Rome, with its papal 
government and its French garrison, was not yet Italian, and 


724 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. XXVII. 


provincial jealousies must continue as long as any but the Eternal 
City was regarded as the capital. But all these considerations were 
forgotten on February, 18, 1861, when the first Italian parliament, 
containing representatives from all the provinces except Vene- 
tia and the Patrimony, met in the Palazzo Carignano at Turin. 
Vociferous cheers greeted the arrival of “ Victor Emmanuel IL., 
by the grace of God and the will of the nation King of Italy.” 
This ceremony was followed within a few weeks by the death of 
the man who had contributed more than any other to bring about 
this grand result. Cavour must always rank as one of the ablest 
diplomatists of the nineteenth century, but he was more than a 
diplomatist, he was a statesman. His keen perception that Italy 
could not be set free without foreign assistance; the adroit use 
which he made of Napoleon III.; the way in which he evaded 
the treaty of Villafranca; and, above all, the masterly manner 
in which he ousted Garibaldi from Naples, were all diplomatic 
triumphs of the highest order. But his internal reforms; his 
measures for the advancemeut of trade and education ; his adherence 
to liberal principles in the face of a revolutionary party; his 
appreciation of the difficulties of uniting southern with northern 
Italy, are no less conclusive proofs of his constructive statesmanship. 
It was hard for him to die before his work was completed by the 
acquisition of Venice and Rome, but he may be credited with 
having anticipated the way in which this completion was to be 
brought about. He foresaw the rise of Prussia, and sought to 
enlist the sympathies of that power with the Italian cause. He 
was anxious to settle the Roman question peaceably so as to avoid 
offending the Roman Catholic powers. ‘The temporal power had 
undoubted advantages, but at the same time it imposed serious 
checks upon the action of the church. Cavour offered the removal 
of these checks in exchange for the sacrifice of temporal sovereignty. 
His favourite expression, “ Libera Chiesa in Libero Stato” (a free 
Church in a free State), has been rightly chosen as the inscription 
on his tomb. 

§ 6. Cavour left no minister to take his place, and the con- 
tinuance of his policy fell to Victor Emmanuel himself. Carefully 
abstaining from opening the question either of Rome or Venice, he 
sought to utilise the interval of peace to break down the barriers 
between the different provinces of Italy, and to extend to all alike 
the benefits of material prosperity. But his subjects could not 
imitate the prudence and statesmanship of their ruler. Garibaldi 
believed that his volunteers could drive the French from Rome as 
easily as they had overthrown the Bourbons in Naples and Sicily, 
and that the government would again stand quietly by while it 


A.D. 1861—1864. ASPROMONTE. G25 


was done. He raised his standard at Reggio and announced his 
intention of marching upon Rome. But it was impossible for 
Victor Emmanuel to allow a war to be carried on from his own 
territories against a friendly power. At Aspromonte Garibaldi 
found himself confronted by the Italian army under Cialdini, and 
after a short struggle his troops were routed and himself a prisoner, 
(August 29, 1862). The king could not have acted otherwise, but 
a storm of indignation greeted this apparent ingratitude towards 
the hero who had given him a crown. But Victor Emmanuel was 
undismayed, and continued negotiations with France for the evacu- 
ation of Rome. In September, 1864, a convention was at last 
concluded with Napoleon III., who agreed to a gradual withdrawal 
of the French garrison, on condition that the Italian government 
should undertake the defence of the Papal States against all 
external attack. The convention was bitterly attacked at the 
time as being a renunciation of Rome as the capital of Italy. In 
reality it was a virtual cession of Rome to Italy on condition that 
a sufficient interval should elapse to show that its annexation was 
not the result of the departure of the French. As a further 
guarantee of this, Napoleon demanded that the capital should be 
transferred from Turin to some other city. For this purpose 
Florence was chosen, and the court was removed to its new residence 
in 1865. The history of the further advance of Italian unity is 
bound up with affairs in Germany, to which attention must now 
be directed. 

§ 7. A confused and depressing period of German history followed 
the failure of the movement towards union which had been inau- 
gurated by the Frankfort Parliament. Austria had humiliated 
Prussia at Olmiitz, and had gained a conspicuous victory in the 
restoration of the Bundestag. But the two great states con- 
tinued their rivalry, and Germany was divided into parties 
adhering to one or the other. The National Verein adopted the 
views of the “ Little German” party at Frankfort, advocated the 
exclusion of Austria from Germany, and demanded the establish- 
ment of the proposed constitution of 1849. On the other hand, 
the Reform Verein aimed at the creation of a united state in 
which both Austria and Prussia should find a place. If either 
state had made itself the champion of constitutional liberties, it 
might have played the part which Piedmont played in Italy. But 
the reaction in Berlin was quite as strong as in Vienna. Frederick 
William IV. lost his faculties in 1857, and the regency was 
entrusted to his brother, prince William, who in 1861 became 
king as William I. The Kreuz party continued to direct the 
policy of Prussia, and to repress every movement that savoured of 


726 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. xxvul. 


revolutionary principles. The result of this attitude on the part 
of Prussia was that the rivalry with Austria was a purely selfish 
quarrel, and that there was no constitutional principle to contend 
for as in Italy. In fact the system of repression came to an end in 
Austria, where it had originated, while it was still in full vigour 
in the northern kingdom. ‘The Austrian government was involved 
in such disastrous financial difficulties—difficulties which were 
immensely increased by its Italian wars—that reform became an im- 
perative necessity. In 1861 the emperor Francis Joseph issued 
a new constitution establishing an Upper House of imperial nomi- 
nees, and a Lower House of deputies from the provincial diets. 
The proposal was not cordially accepted by the chief non-German 
provinces, Hungary, Venetia, aud Bohemia. They declined to 
acknowledge any single constitution for the whole empire, and 
demanded the recognition of their separate liberties. As they 
refused to send deputies to the Diet, the scheme broke down. But 
it served to conciliate for a moment the liberal party in Germany, 
and Austria took advantage of this to strike a blow at its rival. 
In 1863 the German princes were invited to a meeting at Frank- 
fort, where it was proposed to reorganise the Bund by creating a 
directory of five princes with the Austrian emperor as hereditary 
president. But Prussia, whose position in the Zollverein was a 
source of great influence in Germany, refused to attend the meeting, 
and succeeding in defeating the proposed scheme. At this juncture 
the relations of the two great states were altogether modified by 
events in Schleswig-Holstein. 

§ 8. The treaty of London (1852) had guaranteed the unity of 
the Danish monarchy, and promised the succession to Christian of 
Gliicksburg, but it had fa'led to satisfy the national aspirations of 
the duchies. ‘The Bund, which had never accepted the London 
treaty, was involved in constant disputes with Denmark about the 
details of the constitution which Frederick VII. issued in 1855. <A 
strong Danish party in Copenhagen exerted its influence over the 
king to prevent any concessions being made to Germany, and at 
last in 1863 the Bund determined to send an “ army of execution ” 
into the duchies. But Denmark was encouraged to resist by the 
marriage of Christian of Gliicksburg’s daughter, Alexandra, with 
the Prince of Wales (March 10, 1863), which seemed likely to secure 
the support of England. At this critical moment Frederick VII. 
died, and Christian of Gliicksburg ascended the throne as Chris- 
tian IX. But Frederick of Augustenburg seized the opportunity 
to revive the claim to the duchies which his father had been com- 
pelled to renounce after the treaty of London. He could rely upon 
the sympathy of the Bund, and the enthusiastic support of the 


A.D. 1861-1864. SCHLESWIG-HOLSTEIN. 727 


Holsteiners. In December the army of the Bund entered Holstein 
and occupied the duchy without any opposition from the Danes. 
The duke of Augustenburg was proclaimed king as Frederick VIIL., 
though he left the administration to the cummissioners of the Bund. 
But matters were unexpectedly complicated by the intervention of 
Austria and Prussia. ‘The two powers had been partners to the 
treaty of London, and could not therefore adopt the same attitude - 
as the Bund, but they were determined to have a decisive voice 
in the settlement of a question which was so vitally important to 
Germany. ‘The Prussian ministry had been headed since 1862 by 
Bismarck, who exercised a sort of fascination over the Austrian 
minister Rechberg. Germany was astounded to see the two rival 
states acting in apparently complete concord. Regardless of the pro- 
tests of England, the combined armies marched through Holstein 
to Schleswig, which they determined to occupy as a hostage until 
Christian 1X. should agree to a satisfactory settlement. The 
Danes had not defended Holstein, which was legally a member of 
the Bund, but they were resolved to hold out in Schleswig, which 
had no such connection with Germany, and which contained a large 
Danish population. But the superiority of the invading forces was 
too overwhelming. ‘The Danes had to retire from their boasted 
fortification, the Dannewirke (Feb. 6), their obstinate de‘ence of 
Diippel proved unavailing, and Fredericia surrendered (April 28). 
An armistice was now concluded while negotiations were carried (n 
in a conference at London, presided over by Lord John Russell. 
The Bund demanded the complete severance, of the duchies from 
Denmark under the duke of Augustenburg. Austria and Prussia, 
on the other hand, were willing to allow the ‘personal union” 
under the Danish crown to continue on condition that the duchies 
should receive a separate constitution, England, which had 
hitherto adhered firmly to the treaty of London, at last admittcd 
that concessions must be made to Germany, and proposed a division 
of Schleswig into a Danish and a German half. This was accepted 
in principle, but no agreement could be come to about the dividing 
line, and the negotiations were broken off. The Austro-Prussian 
army renewed the war and occupied the whole peninsula of Jutland. 
Christian 1X., unable to resist any longer, and bitterly disappoint d 
at the failure of English support, concluded the treaty of Vienna 
(Oct. 80, 1864). No stipulation was made as to the future fate 
of the duchies, which were simply ceded to Austria and Prussia, 
and the king pledged himself to accept any arrangement that might 
commend itself to the two powers. The troops of the Bund evacuated 
Holstein in December, and the duke of Augustenburg discovered 
that his chances of the succession were as remote as ever. 


728 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. Xxvul. 


It was evident that the relations of Olmiitz had been reversed, 
and that in the recent transactions Prussia had led and Austria had 
followed. Bismarck was determined to maintain this position and 
to utilise the ceded duchies in the interests of Prussia. Ever since 
his accession to power he had set himself to increase the military 
resources of his country, and had not hesitated to avow his con- 
viction that “blood and iron” would prove more effective instru- 
ments in’the settlement of German difficulties than the speeches 
and votes which had failed so lamentably in 1849. He was en- 
couraged in his aggressive attitude by the domestic troubles of 
Austria. Hungary and Venetia were on the verge of revolt, and all 
the non-German provinces were discontented. ‘To conciliate them 
the government suspended the constitution of 1861 and restored 
the old system of provincial diets. But this measure alienated the 
German population of Austria proper, and failed to satisfy the 
Slavs, Magyars, and Italians. Under these circumstances it was 
difficult for Austria to oppose a resolute opposition to the designs 
of Prussia. The lesser German states tried in vain to obtain a 
voice in the final settlement of the duchies. Some supported the 
duke of Augustenburg, others proposed that the choice of a ruler 
should be submitted to the free choice of the inhabitants. Bismarck 
received all these suggestions with contemptuous silence, and con- 
tinued to treat the matter as a private affair of the two great powers. 
At Gastein a convention was made (August 14, 1865), by which 
Austria undertook to administer Holstein, and Prussia Schleswig, 
while the small duchy of Lauenburg was sold to Prussia for 
2,500,000 Danish thalers. The port of Kiel was occupied by 
Prussia, which at once commenced the erection of fortifications. 
The convention of Gastein was Bismarck’s revenge for the humilia- 
tion of Prussia at Olmiitz. But it was evident that the arrangement 
could be only temporary, and that the relations of the two powers 
in the duchies and in Germany could only be settled by war. 

§ 9. The war was not long delayed. Austria was already convinced 
that its recent policy had been a great blunder, and sought to 
retrace its steps. Recliberg had been dismissed from the ministry, 
and his successors set themselves to conciliate the Bund and to 
support the claims of the duke of Augustenburg. While Man- 
teuffel, the governor of Schleswig, rigorously forbade every ex- 
pression of popular opinion, public meetings in favour of duke 
Frederick were openly held in Holstein under the very eyes of the 
Austrian representative, Gablenz. Bismarck wrote to Vienna in 
January, 1866, to complain of the encouragement of ‘‘ demagogic 
anarchy ” in Holstein. In April he concluded an offensive and 
defensive alliance with Victor Emmanuel. In a circular :dispatch 


A.D. 1865-1866. SEVEN WEEKS’ WAR. 729 


he announced that Prussia was arming, not only for its immediate 
security, but also to obtain substantial guarantees for the future. 
As these guarantees were not afforded by the existing constitution 
of the Bund, he declared that that constitution must be amended, 
and demanded that its revision should be entrusted to a German 
parliament elected by universal suffrage. This was a startling 
proposal from a minister who prided himself upon being the 
champion of order against revolution, and who had shown resolute 
hostility to popular liberties at home. In Austria, the military 
party once more gained the upper hand, and was encouraged by 
the support of the middle German states, and the unpopularity of 
Bismarck’s ministry in Berlin, to make energetic preparations for 
war. Napoleon III. negotiated with both parties, and sought to 
utilise the crisis to gain an increase of French territories in the 
direction of the Rhine. But events marched too fast for the pro- 
crastinating diplomacy of the French Emperor. OnJune 1, Austria 
announced that the question of Schleswig-Holstein should be sub- 
mitted to the Bundestag, and that a meeting of the estates of 
Holstein should be summoned to declare the wishes of that pro- 
vince. Ten days latter a formal accusation was brought against 
Prussia of violating the convention of Gastein, and the mobilisation 
of the troops of the Burd was demanded. Bismarck responded by 
bringing forward his proposal for a new constitution of the Bund, 
which was to be divided into a northern federation under Prussia 
and a southern under Bavaria, while Austria was to be excluded 
altogether. Manteuffel was ordered to occupy Holstein if the 
estates met, and he obeyed the order on June 8. The Austrian 
troops were too weak to resist, and the duchy was annexed to 
Schleswig under Prussian rule. On June 14 the Bundestag, by nine 
votes to six, accepted the Austrian demand for the mobilisation of 
the troops. The Prussian representative at once declared that this 
resolution was a breach of the constitution of 1815, pronounced 
the dissolution of the Bund, and quitted the assembly. War was 
declared against Saxony, Hanover and Hesse-Cassel, which had 
supported Austria. 

The general expectation in Europe was that the war, which broke 
out on June 15, would be a long and desperate struggle, in which 
the superior resources of Austria wonld secure an ultimate victory. 
But these anticipations were completely falsified by the event. The 
Prussian troops were better organised than any others in Europe, 
and they were armed with the needle-gun, which enabled them to 
fire four or five times as fast as their opponents. On the other 
hand, Austria was in a hopeless financial position, its armies were 
composed of various nationalities, it had to send more than 150,000 


730 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. XXVIII. 


men to defend Venetia against the Italians, and it had no general to 
be compared with the Prussian commander-in-chief, Von Moltke. 
In every engagement the lrussians gained conspicuous successes. 
. Hesse-Cassel and Saxony were occupied without opposition. The 
_Hanoverian army, after being defeated at Langensalza, was com- 
pelled to capitulate (June 29). It was in Bohemia that the main 
armies of Austria and Prussia came into collision. After a series 
of smaller engagements the great battle was fought on July 3 at 
Sadowa (or Koniggritz), where the Austrians were completely 
defeated. On July 26 an armistice was concluded at. Nikolsburg, 
bv which Austria agreed to withdraw from the Bund, to renounce 
all claims in Schleswig and Holstein, to recognise the new con- 
stitution which Prussia was to arrange for Germany, and to cede 
Venetia to Italy. On August 23 the preliminaries of Nikolsburg 
were confirmed by the peace of Prague, and Prussia undertook to 
restore the kingdom of Saxony, and to transfer northern Schleswig 
to Denmark if the inhabitants expressed a wish for such a transfer. 
The latter provision was wholly evaded, and though the former 
was fulfilled, it was on such hard conditions that Saxony became 
little more than a vassal state of Prussia. The two other provinces 
which had been occupied, Hanover and Hesse-Cassel, together with 
Schleswig-Holstein, Nassau, and Frankfort, were to remain in the’ 
possession of Prussia. 

§ 10. Prussia now set to werk to draw up the plan of a North 
German Confederation, to include all states to the north of the 
Main. Saxony, the only powerful state, was unable in existing 
circumstances to make any opposition. The scheme was first ela- 
borated in a conference of plenipotentiaries of the various govern- 
ments, and was then submitted to an assembly chosen by universal 
suffrage which sat in Berlin from Feb. 24 to April 17, 1867. The 
executive government was entrusted to the Prussian king as here- 
ditary President and General of the Confederation. He was to be 
assisted by a Federal Council (Bundesrath), which was to be 
presided over by a chancellor appointed by Prussia. Legislation 
was to be in the hands of a Reichstag, the deputies to which were 
to be chosen by direct suffrage. Contributions to the common mili- 
tary expenditure were to be regulated by the number of soldiers 
which each state supplied for the federal army. Military service 
was organised on the Prussian system, and was made compulsory 
on every citizen over seventeen years of age. Bismarck was 
appointed to be the first Chancellor of the Confederation. With 
the chief states of southern Germany, Prussia was connected by the 
Zollverein, and special treaties were concluded with Bavaria, Wur- 
temberg and Baden, by which their territories were guaranteed, 


A.D. 1866~1867. ITALY ACQUIRES VENICE. fol 


and their armies were placed at the disposal of Prussia in case of 
war. Thus the whole of Germany, with the exception of Austria, 
became practically subject to Prussian sovereignty. 

Austria had been taught by the disasters of the war to realise 
how fatal to the empire was the discontent and disunion of the 
subject populations. Venetia was resigned almost with cheerful- 
ness, and a serious effort was made to pacify Hungary. The work 
of conciliation was carried out by Count Beust, who had recently 
been minister in Saxony, but had been compelled to quit that 
kingdom by the enmity cf Prussia, The government found it 
necessary to restore the old system of dualism. Hungary received 
a ministry and a diet of its own, while another diet and ministry 
were created fur the provinces west of the Leitha. Joint delega- 
tions were to be appointed by the two diets for the consideration of 
imperial business, and there were to be three common ministers, for 
finance, war, and foreign affairs. This constitution, with improve- 
ments in detail, has been preserved to the present day. 

§ 11. In Italy the Seven Weeks’ War had produced important 
results. Before the outbreak of hostilities Austria had attempted 
to buy off Italian hostility by offering the cession of Venetia, but 
Victor Emmanuel had preferred to adhere to his treaty with Prussia. 
As soon as the war began in Germany, the Italian forces advanced 
towards the Quadrilateral. They were divided into two armies, 
one of which, under Cialdini, was to cross the Po at Ferrara, and to 
cut the line of communication between Venice and Verona, while 
the other, under the king and La Marmora, was to invest the 
fortresses. The plan of the campaign was based on the belief that 
the Austrians would stand on the defensive, and all calculations 
were upset when the archduke Albert quitted his position and 
attacked the Italians. At Custozza an obstinate battle was fought 
(June 24), and after twelve hours’ fighting the Italian army was 
forced to retire to the Mincio. In July the Italian fleet was almost 
destroyed by the Austrians in the Adriatic near the island of Lissa. 
Before an opportunity was offered of retrieving these mortifying 
disasters, the news came that the German war had been terminated 
at Nikolsburg, and that Venetia was offered for the acceptance of 
Italy. It was a great blow to Italian pride to have to receive the 
coveted province at the hands of an ally instead of winning it by 
the prowess of the national arms, But Victor Emmanuel realised 
that it was not the time for excessive punctiliousness, and accepted 
the cession of Venetia by the treaty of Vienna (Oct. 3). The usual 
plébiscite was almost unanimous in favour of annexation, and in 
November the king was received with enthusiasm in Venice. Aus- 
tria now possessed no territory that could be called Italian except 


732 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. xxvit. 


Trieste and the small district of the Trentino. It was just at this 
time that the evacuation of Rome by the French was completed 
in accordance with the terms of the September Convention. ‘The 
great work of freeing Italy from the foreigners seemed for the 
moment to be accomplished. But one grievance still remained, 
the independent rule of the pope in Rome and the Patrimony, and 
this was protected by the agreement with France. The ministry 
of Rattazzi was foolish enough to think that Rome could be obtained 
in the same way as Cavour had obtained the Two Sicilies. Gari- 
baldi was secretly encouraged to raise a new force of volunteers on 
the papal frontier. The result of this was that Napoleon III. at 
once despatched a new body of French troops to defend the city 
which had just been evacuated. At Mentana (Nov. 3, 1867) 
Garibaldi’s raw levies were utterly routed by the French, and the 
occupation of Rome was resumed for an indefinite period. But the 
sympathies of Italy weie for the misguided and defeated patriots, 
and the victory of the French chassepdts at Mentana destroyed all 
sentiments of gratitude for the services which France had previously 
rendered to the cause of Italian independence. 

§ 12. In no country was the result of the Austro-Prussian war 
such an unwelcome surprise as in France. Napoleon III. was 
humiliated at this time by events in Mexico. In 1861, France, 
England and Spain had agreed to send a joint expedition to demand 
satisfaction for injuries inflicted on their subjects by Juarez, the 
head of the Mexican Republic. ‘The two latter powers withdrew 
their forces when the object of the treaty had been attained. But 
the French emperor conceived the chimerical project of forming a 
grand empire of the Latin race in Mexico, which should counter- 
balance the power of the United States. He ordered his troops to 
conquer Mexico, which was achieved in 1863, and he offered the 
sovereignty to the Austrian archduke Maximilian, who accepted 
it in 1864. But Maximilian quarrelled with the French commander, 
Bazaine; the United States threatened to make war on the new 
empire; and Napoleon found the expense of the occupation a 
serious embarrassment. In 1866 the French troops were withdrawn, 
and the result was that the archduke was shot by Mexican rebels 
in the next year. While this mortification was still fresh, Napoleon 
discovered that his policy in Germany had been a complete failure. 
He had determined to utilise the quarrel of the two powers to 
obtain territorial acquisitions for France, and if the war had been a 
long one he might have succeeded. But the rapid success of Prussia 
foiled all his plans. Germany had received a strong organisation 
under the headship of a military state, and France had little pro- 
spect of obtaining any advantages to counterbalance the increased 


A.D. 1867-1868, ISABELLA OF SPAIN. 733 


power of its formidable neighbour. The emperor opened negotia- 
tions with the king of Holland for the purchase of Luxemburg, 
which by the treaty of Vienna was a member of the German Bund, 
but which had become independent by the dissolution of that body. 
Prussia, however, stepped in to prevent the conclusion of the treaty, 
and a diplomatic conference at London arranged that Luxemburg 
should remain subject to the Dutch king, but that the fortifications 
should be demolished and its neutrality guaranteed. Napoleon III. 
now endeavoured to form a close alliance with Austria, and in August, 
1867, he paid a formal visit to the emperor Francis Joseph at 
Salzburg. The visit was nominally one of condolence on the fate of 
the archduke Maximilian, but contemporary opinion persisted in 
attributing to it-a political importance which it may not have pos- 
sessed. At all events no important results followed the interview, 
but from this time it was certain that France would seize the first 
opportunity to measure its strength against the northern state which 
had made such a sudden stride towards the leadership in Europe. 
This opportunity soon presented itself in the affairs of Spain. 

§ 13. It would be tedious to narrate in detail the domestic his- 
tory of Spain under Isabella of Bourbon. The queen sought to 
cloak the dissoluteness of her private life by a superstitious devotion 
to religion and the church, and her personal sympathies were on 
the side of the clerical and reactionary party. But occasionally the 
progresistas and moderados forced themselves into office, though 
their jealous rivalrv prevented them from maintaining the power 
to which their numbers entitled them. At last, in 1866, Isabella 
was induced to take energetic measures against the opposition. 
Narvaez was appointed chief minister, and the most prominent 
liberals, O’Donnell, Serrano, and Prim, sought safety in exile. The 
Cortes was dissolved, and many of the deputies, including the 
president, Rosas, were transported to the Canary Islands. <A 
royalist reign of terror was established in Spain, and was continued 
after the death of Narvaez (April, 1868) by his successor, Gonzalez 
Bravo. But the Spaniards were completely alienated from Bourbon 
rule. They resented the scandals of the court and the despotism of 
the contemptible camarilla of priests and courtiers who surrounded 
the queen. ‘The various sections of the liberal party were driven 
into union by their common danger. In September, 1868, Prim 
and Serrano returned to Spain, raised the standard of revolt, and 
offered the people the bribe of universal suffrage. The revolution 
was promptly effected, and Isabella fled to France. I'he leaders of 
the movement were not republicans, and they at once looked round 
for a prince to fill the vacant throne. ‘here were three Bourbon can- 
didates, Alfonso, Isabella’s son; the duke of Montpensier, husband 


734 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. XXVIL 


of the queen’s sister; and Don Carlos, the representative of the 
legal claims of the male line. But no one of them was acceptable 
to the people or to their leaders, and it was necessary to seek a 
foreign ruler. Serrano was appointed regent during the interregnum, 
and Prim undertook the office of minister of war. The Cortes drew 
up a new constitution, by which a hereditary king was to rule in 
conjunction with a senate and a popular chamber. The “ Iberian” 
party wished to unite the whole peninsula by the election of the 
king of Portugal, but he refused to entertain the proposal. At 
last it was decided to offer the crown to Leopold of Hohenzollern- 
Sigmaringen, belonging to a distant branch of the royal family of 
Prussia. The prince expressed his personal willingness to accept 
the offer, but, as a Prussian subject, he demanded and obtained the 
approval of William I. 

The prince of Hohenzollern was connected with the Bonaparte 
family, as his father had married Antoinette Murat, and it was 
hoped that his candidature would therefore be acceptable to the 
French emperor. But Napoleon III. represented the whole affair 
as an intrigue of Bismarck to extend the authority of Prussia in 
Europe. To satisfy him, the prince withdrew his acceptance of the 
Spanish crown (July 12). But Napoleon and the Ollivier ministry 
were convinced that a war was the only means of reviving the 
waning attachment of the people to the empire. A plébiscite in 
1869 had approved a new constitution, but the increased number 
of negative votes had been very significant. They were encouraged 
by the belief that the states of southern Germany were jealous of 
Prussian ascendancy, and would welcome the prospect of recovering 
their independence. The French envoy, Benedetti, was instructed 
to demand a promise from the Prussian king that, if Spain again 
pressed the Hohenzollern candidature, he would -interpose his 
authority to prohibit it. William I. courteously but firmly refused 
to give any such pledge. On July 19, France declared war against 
Prussia, and the streets of Paris resounded with cries of a Berlin! 
For the moment the empire seemed to be stronger and more popular 
than at any time since its establishment. | 

§ 14. All the hopes that had been based upon German disunion 
were speedily disappointed. The North German Confederation 
placed the whole of its forces at the disposal of Prussia, and voted 
120 million thalers for the expenses of the war: the southern states 
hastened to fulfil the obligations imposed by the treaties of 1867. 
More than 440,000 men were placed in the field, under the nominal 
command of the king, but the real direction of Von Moltke. The 
Crown Prince, prince Frederick Charles, and Steinmetz were the 
chief leaders of divisions. The command of the French army was 


A.D. 1869-1870. FRANCO-GERMAN WAR. 785 


assumed by Napoleon in person, his chief marshals being Lebeeuf, 
Bazaine, MacMahon, and Canrobert. The regency in Paris was 
entrusted to the Empress Eugénie. The first action was fought at 
Saarbriick (Aug. 3), where the young Prince Imperial underwent 
his ‘‘ baptism of fire” From this moment events marched with a 
rapidity that astounded Europe. In every engagement the Ger- 
mans showed an immense superiority in everything but personal 
bravery. ‘The French fought with conspicuous courage, but they 
had to contend against superior arms and superior generalship. They 
were the first in the field, and ought to have taken the aggressive. 
Their delay allowed the Germans to enter Alsace, and to carry on 
the war on French soil. MacMahon was defeated at Weissemburg 
(Aug. 3), and again at Worth (Aug. 6). General Frossard was 
driven from the heights of Spicheren by the army of Frederick 
Charles and Steinmetz (Aug. 6). The main force of the French 
was now concentrated near Metz under Bazaine, while MacMahon, 
who had been wounded at Worth, retreated to Chalons. At 
Gravellotte a bloody and decisive victory was gained by the 
Germans (Aug. 18), and Bazaine shut himself up in Metz. 
l’rederick Charles was entrusted with the blockade of the fortress, 
while the rest of the German army under the Crown Prince 
advanced upon Paris. MacMahon was now ordered by the emperor 
to march from Chalons to relieve Metz. At Sedan the French 
were completely defeated (Sept. 1), and on the next day the 
whole army capitulated. Napoleon himself became a prisoner and 
was sent to Wilhelmshoéhe near Cassel. 

‘The news of these crushing disasters overthrew the French 
Empire. The Empress Eugénie fled to England, a ‘“ government 
of national defence” was formed by the deputies of Paris, and the 
Republic was formally proclaimed (Sept. 4). A ministry was ap- 
pointed, of which the leading spirits were Jules Favre, minister 
of foreign affairs, and Gambetta, minister of the interior. The 
Senate was abolished, and the Corps Législatif was dissolved. 
The defence of the capital was left in the hands of general Trochu, 
who had been appointed by the regent before her flight. M. Thiers, 
who had no republican sympathies, and who had refused a place in 
the provisional government, undertook an informal embassy to 
the European sovereigns to request their mediation on behalf of 
France. 

§ 15. Meanwhile the advance of the Germans continued. On 
September 20 Paris was invested ; on the 28th Strasburg surren- 
dered; and, finally, on October 28 Bazaine capitulated at Metz, 
and 150,000 French troops, including 3 marshals, 50 generals, and 
nearly 6000 officers, became prisoners of war. Gambetta, who had 


736 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. XXvII. 


escaped from Paris in a balloon, organised the “army of- the 
Loire,” which carried on a desperate but hopeless resistance to 
the invaders. Paris held out with obstinate courage, though the 
inhabitants were compelled to feed on vermin to escape starvation. 
To add to the general distress, the communists organised an 
émeute under Flourens, Blanqui, etc., which almost succeeded in 
overthrowing the government, but was ultimately put down by the 
national guard. In the provinces the Germans carried all before 
them in a number of local engagements. Garibaldi offered his 
services and came as far as Besancon, but it was too late to effect 
anything. Gambetta’s army of the Loire was practically destroyed. 
The only place besides the capital which held out was the fortress 
of Belfort in Alsace. At last, the condition of Paris made it im- 
perative to come to terms, and the preliminaries of a peace were 
arranged by Bismarck and Jules Favre at Versailles. An armistice 
was concluded for three weeks, and all military operations were to 
cease except those in the Jura and the siege of Belfort; a national 
assembly was to mect at Bordeaux to settle the terms of peace. 
The forts of Paris were to be placed in the hands of the Germans, 
but they were to be excluded from the city; the garrison was to 
surrender as prisoners of war, except 12,C00 men who were left 
to maintain order; the blockade was to continue, but measures 
were arranged for supplying food to the citizens. The capitulation 
raised a feeling of bitter indignation in the provinces, and Gam- 
betta announced his determination to continue the war in defiance 
of the armistice. But Jules Simon was despatched to Bordeaux to 
prohibit this useless quixotism, and Gambetta in disgust resigned 
his place in the ministry. ‘The assembly met at Bordeaux on 
February 12, and elected M. Thiers as “head of the executive 
government of the French Republic.” The veteran politician, 
whose services to his country in the moment of disaster have out- 
weighed any errors of his previous career, at once undertook the 
difficult task of securing the best possible terms from Bismarck. 
The preliminaries were signed on February 26. France ceded the 
whole of Alsace except Belfort (which had surrendered on Feb. 16) 
and the greater part of Lorraine, including the fortresses of Metz 
and Thionville. The indemnity was fixed at five milliards of francs, 
to be paid within three years. The German army of occupation 
was to be withdrawn gradually as each instalment of the in- 
demnity was paid, and while it remained was to be supported at the 
expense of France. ‘The national assembly accepted the terms by 
546 votes to 107, and the final treaty of Frankfort was signed 
on May 10, 1871. 

The Third French Republic was established at a period of national 


A.D. 1871-1878. THE GERMAN EMPIRE. Jy 


humiliation unparalleled since the 15th century, but it has achieved 
greater permanence than either of its predecessors. Napoleon III. 
took up his residence at Chiselhurst, where he died in January, 1873 
The death of his unfortunate son the Prince Imperial, in South 
Africa (June 1, 1879) seems to have rendered hopeless any project 
of another Bonapartist restoration. The royalist party has also 
suffered from the discord between the elder Bourbons and the house 
of Orleans. ‘l’o these causes, and to the popular desire for rest, the 
Republic has undoubtedly owed much of its strength. The first 
President, M. Thiers, held office until May 24, 1873, when a hostile 
vote of the assembly led to his resignation, and he was replaced by 
Marshal MacMahon. In 1875 a new republican constitution was 
drawn up which created two chambers, an elective Senate and a 
Chamber of Deputies. As the President showed an inclination 
to a reactionary policy, the republicans formed a strong opposi- 
tion. In 1878 MacMahon resigned, and M. Jules Grévy, who had 
won general respect in a long political career, was chosen as his 
successor. 

§ 16. In Germany the result of the war was to give a great im- 
pulse towards the establishment of unity under Prussian headship. 
The work which the Parliament of Frankfort had failed to carry out 
in the revolutionary period was easily accomplished at a time when 
Germans were fighting side by side for acommon Tatherland. Bis- 
marck was enabled to sweep away the unnatural line of the Main, and 
to extend the Confederation of 1867 over the four states of southern 
Germany. ‘The terms of union were settled in separate negotiations 
with the governments of Bavaria, Wurtemberg, Baden, and Grand- 
ducal Hesse. They were then submitted for formal approval to the 
estates of each province and to the diet of the North German Con- 
federation. On January 18, 1871, the veteran King of Prussia was 
formally proclaimed German Emperor in the great Hall of Mirrors 
at Versailles. Bismarck, the Cavour of Germany, was appointed 
Imperial Chancellor. It is idle to prophecy as to the probable dura- 
tion of this attempt to revive in Germany a national unity that had 
perished six centuries ago. The German Empire has been acknow- 
ledged since 1871 to be the first military power in Europe, and the 
national pride in this position has made the people overlook many 
domestic inconveniences and even humiliations. Bismarck has been 
able to maintain the ascendancy of Prussia in spite of serious quar- 
rels with the Roman Catholic clergy, and in spite of the threatening 
attitude of social democracy. 

§ 17. The first reverses at Weissemburg and W6rth had been 
followed by the hasty recall of the French troops from Rome, and 
the city was offered to the Italian government as the price of armed 


33 


738 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. XXVII, 


assistance to France. But Victor Emmanuel had already declared 
the neutrality of Italy; it would have been imprudent to join what 
was evidently a losing cause, and the link between Italy and France 
had been broken at Mentana. On September 11, ten days after the 
capitulation of Sedan, Italian troops crossed the frontier of the Papal 
States. Pius 1X. had held an cecumenical council in the previous 
year to decree the dogma of papal infallibility, and had thus decided 
a dispute that had remained unsolved since the famous assemblies 
_ of Constance and Basel. Such aman was not likely to resign his 
temporal power of his own accord. All suggestions of a’ peaceful 
compromise were met with the invariable answer of non possumus. 
On September 18 the bombardment of Rome commenced, and two 
days later the city was occupied. A plébiscite declared for annexa- 
tion to the Italian kingdom by an overwhelming majority, and in 
the next year the capital was transferred from Florence to the 
Iiternal City. No protest was made against this natural completion 
of the Italian state. Victor. Emmanuel carried out the policy of 
Cavour, left the Pope in undisturbed possession of the Vatican, and 
ostentatiously proclaimed the complete independence of his eccle- 
siastical authority. It was a great blow to the king to be involved 
in hostile relations to the head of his church, but he was consoled 
by the thought that he had obtained the object of his life. He had 
still much work to doin welding together the discordant parts of his 
kingdom, and increasing its material prosperity. His prosperous 
reign was ended by a sudden death on January 9, 1878, when the 
crown passed to bis eldest son, Humbert I. 

§ 18. It proved a very difficult task to fill up the vacancy in the 
Spanish throne, which had been productive of such vast. results. 
After the collapse of the Hohenzollern candidature, the crown was 
offered to Victor Emmanuel’s second son, Amadeus of Aosta (born in 
1845). The offer was accepted, and the young prince did his best 
to perform tke duties which he had undertaken. But Spain was 
wholly unfit for a constitutional monarchy. Wearied out and dis- 
gusted by the incessant factions and intrigues, Amadeus resigned his 
crown in 1878. A provisional republic was now formed, of which 
Castelar was the guiding spirit. But Don Carlos raised his standard 
once more in the Basque provinces, while the democrats of the south 
revolted against any central authority, and demanded the establish- 
ment of a republican federation. At last the restoration of order 
was undertaken by the army. ‘The Cortes were dissolved by a coup 
d'état, Castelar indignantly threw up his office, and a military re- 
public was established. This insured the unity of the state, and the 
anarchy of the federalists was suppressed. But it was obvious that 
peace could not be finally restored except by the restoration of the 


A.D. 1870—1876. SPAIN, 739 


monarchy, and the only possible candidate was the young Alfonso, 
the son of the exiled Isabella. In December, 1874, he was proclaimed 
king as Alfonso XII. The first business of the new monarch was 
to terminate the Carlist war, and this was successfully accom- 
plished in 1876. From this time the restored monarchy has main- 
tained itself in Spain, and has satisfied the people, though without 
exciting any enthusiastic devotion. 


740 MODERN EUROPE. 


CHAPTER XXVIII. 


THE EASTERN QUESTION. 
1830-1878. 


§ 1. Russian influence in eastern Europe; conquest of Syria by Mehemet 
Ali; treaty of Unkiar Skelessi. § 2. Renewal of the war in Syria; 
death of Mahmoud II.; treaty of London; Mehemet Ali forced to accept 
the treaty ; convention of the Straits; twelve years of peace. § 3. 
Quarrel about the Holy Places; Nicolas proposes a partition ; Russian 
demands rejected by the Porte ; occupation of the Principalities ; out- 
break of Russo-Turkish war. § 4. France and England join Turkey ; 
the Russians evacuate the Principalities ; war in the Crimea; siege of 
Sebastopol; § 5. Death of Nicolas; failure of negotiations; fall of 
Sebastopol; Treaty of Paris. § 6. Emancipation of the Russian serfs ; 
Polish insurrection ; its suppression. § 7. The kingdom of Greece 
under Otho I. ; revolution of 1843; Greece during the Crimean war ; 
revolution of 1862; expulsion of the Bavarian dynasty ; accession of 
George I.; England cedes the Ionian Islands, § 8. Turkey from 1856- 
1875 ; Cretan insurrection. § 9. Rising in Herzegovina and Bosnia ; 
the Andrassy Note; the Berlin Memorandum; deposition of Abdul 
Azizand Amurath V.; Serviaand Montenegro declare war; attitude of 
Russia; conference of Constantinople. § 10. Russo-Turkish war; 
siege of Plevna; passage of the Balkans; occupation of Adrianople ; 
preliminaries of San Stefano. § 11. Opposition of England; risk of 
war ; Congress of Berlin; cession of Cyprus to England; “ peace with 
honour.” 


§ 1. THE vigorous conduct of the Turkish war in 1829, the estab- 
lishment of an independent kingdom of Greece under Otho L., 
and the suppression of the Polish insurrection of 1830, combined to 
give Russia a commanding position in eastern Europe. Nicolas 
had failed to have his own way in Belgium, but Belgium was a 
distant country, and Russian interests were not directly involved. 
In the East Russia had acted, while the other powers had debated. 
England, it is true, had struck a vigorous blow at Navarino, but 
had subsequently disowned the victory as “an untoward event.” 
The growing ascendancy of Russia was accompanied by the rise of 
a wholly new policy in Europe with regard to the “ Eastern Ques- 
tion.” The old feeling that the Turk was the common enemy of 
Christendom, that every victory over the crescent. no matter what 


A.D. 1830-1839. MEHEMET ALI. 741 


power it was gained by, was a subject for general triumph, com- 
pletely disappeared. On the contrary, the Turkish power was to 
be maintained, because Russia was dreaded. ‘lo satisfy public 
opinion the Porte was to reform its administration, or at least 
to promise reform, but whether reformed or not, the power of the 
infidel in Europe was to be preserved from dissolution. ‘The powers 
overlooked the fact that they really played into the hands of Russia, 
by making that state the champion of the Christian provinces of 
Turkey. The new policy was no sudden creation, but its genesis 
may be clearly traced in the twenty years which followed 1830. 

The first disturbance in the east after the treaty of Adrianople 
was caused by the ambition of Mehemet Ali of Egypt. Mehemet 
had received the island of Candia as the reward for the assistance 
he had given to the Porte in Greece, but he endeavoured to take 
advantage of Turkish weakness to make further acquisitions. In 
1831 he picked a quarrel with the Pasha of Acre, and seized the 
opportunity to conquer Syria. Mahmoud II. sent a large army 
against the Egyptian adventurer, but the Turks were completely 
defeated at Konieh, the ancient Iconium (Dec. 21, 1832). Con- 
stantinople itself was now threatened, and the Sultan applied for 
aid to the European powers. ‘lhe Czar at once responded to this 
appeal, but England and France refused to sanction Russian inter- 
vention and threatened to support the Egyptians. Mahmoud was 
compelled to sign the treaty of Kutaieb, which confirmed Mehemet 
Ali in the possession of Candia and ceded Syria to him as a fief of 
the Porte. Disgusted with the attitude of the western powers, the 
Sultan concluded the treaty of Unkiar Skelessi with the Czar 
(July 8, 1833), and ina secret article agreed to close the Dardanelles 
to all but Russian vessels. 

§ 2. In 1839 Mahmoud IT. made an attempt to recover Syria, 
but his army was routed at Nisib, a village on the Euphrates, by 
Ibrahim, Mehemet’s son (June 24). Four days later the aged Sul- 
tan died, leaving his empire to his son, Abdul Medjid, a feeble and 
dissolute youth of seventeen. Mehemet Ali now conceived the 
bold idea of supplanting the house of Othman on the throne. The 
Turkish fleet was carried to Alexandria and placed at his disposal 
by the admiral, Achmet Fevzy. But Russia was not prepared to 
see an able and vigorous ruler at the head of the Ottoman empire, 
and England had been alienated by Mehemet Ali’s rule in Egypt. 
- For once the two powers pursued a common policy in the east. 
France, on the other hand, remembering the part which it had once 
played under Napoleon, was eager to establish a protectorate over 
Egypt, and became the ardent champion of Mehemet. European 
diplomacy undertook to settle the question, and a conference met in 


742 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. XXVIII. 


London. To the intense disgust of France, a treaty was arranged 
by England, Russia, Austria, and Prussia (July 15, 1840), by 
which the integrity of Turkey was guaranteed and Syria and Candia 
were to be restored. Mehemet Ali refused to accept these terms, 
and force had to be employed. English and Austrian troops defeated 
Ibrahim in Syria, while the English fleet bombarded Beyrout and 
Acre. Finding resistance to the European powers impossible, 
Mehemet Ali accepted the treaty of London (Noy. 27), on condition 
that the Pashalic of Egypt should be confirmed to himself and his 
direct decendants, the Porte receiving one fourth of the revenues as 
tribute. Russia had to sacrifice the secret article of Unkiar Skelessi as 
the price of English support. By a convention of July 18, 1841, 
the tive great powers—France was this time included—recognised 
the absolute right of the Sultan to control the navigation of the 
Dardanelles andthe Bosphorus, and the passage of foreign ships of 
war was prohibited. This was a defeat for Nicolas, but he was 
consoled by the humiliation inflicted on the government of Louis 
Philippe, which he cordially detested as the outgrowth of revolution. 

For the next twelve years the east enjoyed a period of compara- 
tive tranquillity. Mehemet Ali abdicated in 1844, and the govern- 
ment of Egypt passed to his son Ibrahim. Abdul Medjid, under 
the influence of Redschid Pasha and Sir Stratford Canning (Lord 
Stratford de Redcliffe), attempted to reform the administration of 
Turkey on the European model. But all his schemes were frustrated 
by the weakness of the Sultan and the inveterate habits of his 
officials, and the old misrule continued. Russia was undisturbed 
by the revolution of 1842. While thrones and dynasties were 
falling on every side, Nicolas assumed the congenial réle of the 
champion of order and legitimacy. He helped Austria to trample 
on the liberties of Hungary, and to defeat the scheme of anew union 
in Germany. He interfered to prevent the dismemberment of the 
Danish monarchy. When the revolutionary movement spread to 
Moldavia and Wallachia, 40,000 Russian soldiers occupied the 
Principalities, and were not withdrawn until 1850. The Czar seemed 
to have good grounds for believing that he could impose his will 
upon Europe, but the time approached when he was to be rudely 
undeceived. 

§ 3. In 1852 an old dispute about the custody of the Holy Places 
in Jerusalem was revived. Napoleon, then President of the French 
Republic, put himself forward as the champion of the Latin 
Christians, and obtained for them from the Porte the right of free 
entry to the Sepulchre, which had been contested by the Greek 
monks. Nicolas, as the head of the Greek church, considered 
himself aggrieved by this decision. The weakness of Turkey 


A.D. 1840-1854. THE CRIMEAN WAR. 743 


seemed to offer a convenient opportunity for carrying out those 
ageressive designs which the Czar had never ceased to cherish even 
when he joined England in supporting the Porte against Mehemet 
Ali. The opposition of England might be bought off. In January, 
1853, Nicolas disclosed his plans in two important interviews with 
Sir Hamilton Seymour, the English ambassador. Without cir- 
cumlocution, he suggested that the two powers should divide 
between them the territories of the “sick man.” The Danubian 
Principalities, Servia, and Bulgaria were to be formed into inde- 
pendent states under Russian protection; England might annex 
Egypt, so important for the route to India, and also Candia. “If 
England and myself can come to an understanding about this affair, 
I shall care very little what the others (i.e. France, Austria, and 
Prussia) may think or do.” England declined the proposal, and 
excited the Czar’s indignation by publishing Seymour’s despatches. 

In March, Prince Menschikoff appeared in Constantinople, and 
arrogantly demanded from the Porte the recognition of a Russian 
protectorate over all Turkish subjects belonging to the Greek 
church. Abdul Medjid replied by offering to secure the rights of 
the Greek Christians by charter, but refused to do so by treaty. 
Menschikoff withdrew after presenting an wltimatwm, and the 
Russian army under Gortschakoff crossed the Pruth (July 3, 1853), 
to occupy Moldavia and Wallachia as a guarantee for the fulfilment 
of Russian demands. The Porte treated this as an act of hostility, 
and declared war against Russia (Oct. 1). Omar Pasha, a Servian 
renegade in the Turkish service, won a conspicuous victory at 
Oltenitza (Nov. 4). Napoleon III. seized the opportunity to secure 
his recently established empire by embarking in a great war and 
by obtaining the countenance and support of England. The two 
western powers concluded a treaty with the Porte (Nov. 27), and 
promised their assistance if Russia would not accept peace on 
moderate terms. ‘I'he destruction of the Turkish fleet at Sinope by 
Admiral Nakhimof destroyed the last chance of terminating the 
contest by diplomacy. The French and English fleets entered the 
Black Sea, and the Russian admiral had to retire to Sebastopol. 

§ 4. In 1854 France and England declared war against Russia. 
Austria and Prussia remained neutral, but agreed to oppose the 
Russians if they attacked Austria or crossed the Balkans. The 
Czar found himself completely isolated in Europe, the result in 
great measure of the haughty attitude which he had assumed in 
recent years. By sea the allies had an overwhelming superiority, 
but it proved of little use to them. In the Black Sea they 
blockaded Odessa, but in the Baltic they found Cronstadt too strong 
to be attacked, and had to content themselves with the capture of 


744 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. XXVIII. 


Bomarsund. It was obvious that Russia could only be seriously 
attacked by land. In April the Russians, under the veteran 
Paskiewitsch, had laid siege to Silistria, but all attempts to storm 
the fortress were foiled. In July the siege was raised, the Prin- 
cipalities were evacuated, and Austria undertook their occupation 
by a convention with the Porte. Meanwhile the French and Eng- 
lish armies, under St. Arnaud and Lord Raglan, had landed at Galli- 
poli and proceeded to Varna. Finding the war in the Principalities 
settled without their intervention, the allies determined to trans- 
fer the scene of hostilities to the Crimea and to attack Sebastopol. 
They landed without opposition at Eupatoria (Sept. 14), and the 
battle of the Alma (Sept. 20) opened the way to the great fortress. 
A vigorous pursuit of the Russians might have taken Sebastopol at 
once, but the delay enabled Menschikoff to make elaborate prepa- 
rations for defence. The siege lasted for more than twelve months 
and absorbed the interested attention of Europe. The allies 
suffered terribly from the severity of the climate and from the 
defective organisation of the commissariat. At the same time they 
had to resist the constant efforts of the Russian field army to 
interrupt the siege operations. At Balaclava (Oct. 25), and Inker- 
mann (Noy. 5), the Russian attack was only repulsed after hard 
fighting and serious loss on both sides. In January, 1855, the 
allied forces were strengthened by the arrival of 18,000 Sardinian 
troops under La Marmora. 

§ 5. The disasters of 1854 were a bitter humiliation to Nicolas, 
and probably hastened his death, which occurred on March 3, 1855. 
His successor, Alexander IJ., was more pacifically disposed, and it 
was hoped that his accession might lead to the conclusion of peace. 
But the military honour of the allies could only be satisfied by the 
capture of Sebastopol, and hostilities were soon renewed. The 
English fleet rendered conspicuous service by destroying the Russian 
base of supplies, but the garrison, which was now commanded by 
Gortschakoff, held out with unflinching courage. A grand assault, 
in which the English attacked the Redan and the French the 
Malakoff, was repulsed with great loss (June 18). The French 
were now commanded by Pélissier, who had superseded Canrobert, 
the successor of St. Arnaud. On the death of Lord Raglan 
(June 28), General Simpson undertook the command of the English 
army. Although the two armies supported each other with credit- 
able loyalty, there can be no doubt that the dual command was a 
great obtacle to the success of the besiegers. On August 16, a 
Russian attack was repulsed with great loss on the Tschernaya, a 
battle in which the Sardinian contingent distinguished itself. The 
allies had at last succeeded in bringing a superior force of artillery 


A.D. 1854-1859. TREATY OF PARIS. 745 


to bear upon the fortress, and on the 17th the final bombardment 
was commenced. For twenty-three days the batteries kept up an 
almost incessant fire, which inflicted terrible damage. On Sept. 8 a 
general assault was ordered. The French stormed the Malakoff, 
but the English, after carrying the Redan, were compelled to retreat 
for want of support. The Russian position, however, was no longer 
tenable, and on the 10th Gortschakoff evacuated Sebastopol and 
retired to the north side of the harbour. Thesuccess of the allies 
was by no means complete, the Russians still occupied a very strong 
position, and the war might have been indefinitely prolonged if the 
people had not begun tomurmur at the heavy burdens imposed upon 
them. ‘The fall of the Asiatic fortress of Kars (Nov. 28, 1855) was 
a salve to the military vanity of Russia. Austria undertook to 
mediate, the bases of a pacification were agreed upon in January, 
1856, and an armistice was concluded. A conference met at Paris, 
where the final treaty was signed on March 30. The Russian 
protectorate over the Danubian Principalities was abolished; the 
free navigation of the Danube was to be secured by the appoint- 
ment of an international commission; the Black Sea was neutralised, 
and all ships of war, including those of Turkey and Russia, were to 
be excluded, except a small number of light vessels to protect the 
coasts; the Sultan undertook to confirm the privileges of his 
Christian subjects, but the powers agreed not to use this as a 
pretext for interfering with his domestic administration ; the con- 
vention of 1841 about the Straits was confirmed; and the Porte 
was to be admitted to all the advantages of public law and the 
European concert. Russia agreed to restore Kars and to retire 
from the Danube by ceding a strip of Bessarabia to Roumania; 
while the allies were to evacuate Sebastopol and all other conquests 
in the Crimea. These terms were accepted by six powers, viz. 
France, Austria, Great Britain, Prussia, Russia, and Sardinia. A 
fortnight later France, Austria, and Great Britain concluded a 
separate agreement to guarantee the independence and integrity of 
the Turkish empire. In 1858 the signatories of the treaty of Paris 
arranged a convention to settle the relations of Moldavia and Wal- 
lachia. They were to be ruled by separate princes, who were to be 
chosen by the assembly of each principality, and they were to pay 
a tribute to the Porte. But the two principalities elected the same 
prince, Alexander Cusa, and in 1859 the convention was modified to 
allow them to become one state under the name of Roumania. In 
1866 Prince Alexander was deposed, and Roumania fell under the 
rule of Prince Charles of Hohenzollern-Sigmaringen, a member of 
the royal family of Prussia. 

§ 6. The Crimean war had exhausted the resources of Russia and 

33* 


746 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. Xxvutt. 


had given rise to great discontent in that country. To satisfy his 
subjects Alexander II. adopted a liberal policy, and introduced a 
number of reforms, of which the greatest was the emancipation of the 
serfs. ‘The peasants on the crown domains, some 20,000,000 in 
number, received personal freedom by a series of edicts in 1858. 
More difficulty was experienced in dealing with the serfs of private 
owners, but, after long negotiations with the territorial lords, the 
great edict was issued on March 3, 1861. All peasants attached to 
the soil became free cultivators, with the permanent occupation of 
part of their land, the rest being left to the lord. The permanent 
occupation might be exchanged for absolute ownership by a money 
payment, and the government organised a system of loans to enable 
the peasants to free themselves at once by becoming debtors to the 
state. ‘There were political as well as humane motives for the 
measure, which extended the Czar’s authority at the expense of the 
nobles. The change was by no means welcomed with unanimous 
approval. The upper classes resented the advance of despotism and 
demanded the concession of constitutional privileges, while the 
peasants thought less of the future gain than of the immediate loss 
of part of the land which they and their ancestors had cultivated for 
centuries. But, on the whole, the reform was both just and 
necessary, and involved more important social changes than any 
measure since the first French Revolution. 

The liberal policy of the new Czar seems to have excited great 
hopes among the Poles, and their disappointment gave rise to a 
formidable insurrection in 1863. For two years a desperate 
guerilla warfare was carried on against the Russian troops, but in 
the end order and discipline carried the day against ill-organised 
heroism. Prussia, which had never sympathised with the Poles, 
made an alliance with the Czar. England, Austria, and France 
sought to mediate on behalf of the unfortunate nation, and to 
secure for Poland some of the liberties that had been promised in 
1815. But they did not attempt to go beyond paper remonstrances, 
which Russia treated with contempt. The rebellion was put down 
with a hideous barbarity that was disgraceful to a state which had 
just professed such solicitude for its own peasants. It was deter- 
mined to obliterate the last remnants of Polish nationality. The 
country was divided into ten provinces; the Russian language was 
introduced in the schools, and in all public acts; the university of 
Warsaw was Russianised; the Roman Catholic religion became a 
luxury which only the rich could afford ; and to punish the nobles 
for their sympathy with the insurrection, their lands were arbi- 
trarily handed over to the peasants. As the alliance between England 
and France was an effeetive barrier to aggression at the expense of 


A.D. 1837-1864. GREECE. 747 


Turkey, Russia now devoted itself to the easier task of making 
conquests in Asia. Alexander II. did not attempt to play such a 
prominent part in European politics as his father had done. He 
offered no opposition to the establishment of the North German 
Confederation and the German Empire, but he took advantage of 
the Franco-German war to obtain the erasure of the article in the 
treaty of Paris which limited the maritime forces of Russia in the 
Black Sea. 

§ 7. The kingdom of Greece had never thriven as its ardent 
admirers had expected. This was due partly to the defects of the 
Greeks themselves, partly to the errors of king Otho and his 
Bavarian advisers, but mainly to the attitude of the great powers. 
Neither Russia nor England really wished Greece to become a 
powerful state. Russia dreaded a possible rival in the headship 
of the Greek church, and England feared for her commercial 
supremacy in the Levant. Hence the defective frontier which was 
given to the new kingdom, and the constant snubs that it received 
from the European states. Otho, who was only seventeen years 
old when the crown was given to him, assumed the personal — 
control of the government in 18387. Possessed of no ability, ex- 
perience, or energy, but eager to exercise an absolute authority 
for which he was unfitted, he alienated his subjects before they had 
acquired the habits of loyalty. A revolution in 1843 compelled 
him to dismiss his Bavarian followers and to grant a constitution. 
When the Crimean war broke out, the Greeks eagerly seized the 
opportunity to attempt the annexation of Thessaly and Epirus. 
The king offered no opposition to the national movement, which 
was probably prompted by Russian influence. Regardless that by 
a breach of the treaties the support of England and France would 
be forfeited, the government openly took part in the war, which had 
already been commenced by an insurrection in the two provinces, 
The Turks had no difficulty in repulsing the invaders, whose 
rapacity and disorder did much to. conciliate the inhabitants to 
Turkish rule. In May, 1854, English and French troops landed at 
the Piraeus and compelled the king to abandon the Russian alliance. 
From this time the Bavarian monarchy forfeited all hold upon the 
respect or affection of Greece, ‘The Italian war of 1859 evoked the 
warmest sympathy among the Greeks, while Otho and his court 
did not disguise their attachment to Austria. ‘To put down the 
growing opposition, the king endeavoured to tamper with the 
constitution. Newspapers were suppressed, intimidation and cor- 
ruption were employed to influence the elections, and the senate 
was packed with royal nominees. In 1862 a rebellion broke out 
while the king and queen were on a tour through the country. On 


748 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. XXvItt. 


returning to Athens, they found the city closed against them, and 
quitted Greece under the protection of the English flag. Otho, who 
never abandoned his pretensions to the throne, died at Bamberg in 
1867.. Meanwhile a provisional government was established, and a 
national assembly was summoned to elect a new king and to frame 
anew constitution. ‘The assembly refused to.take the responsibility 
of the election, and entrusted it to a national vote. By an over- 
whelming majority the crown was offered to the English prince 
Alfred (the duke of Edinburgh). But the great powers had agreed 
that no member of the ruling families of lrance, Russia, or Great 
Britain should ascend the throne of Greece, and the election was 
annulled. England now undertook to find a constitutionai king, 
but discovered that the vacant throne was not an object of ambition 
to European princes. At last prince William George of Denmark, 
the second son of Christian IX. and the brother of the princess of 
Wales, was selected, and was acknowledged by the Greeks as 
George I. In order to conciliate the Greeks to their new sovereign, 
England resigned the [onian Islands to Greece in 1864. 

§ 8. In Turkey, Abdul Medjid died in 1861, and was succeeded 
by Abdul Aziz. The promises which the Sultan had made in the 
treaty of Paris shared the fate of most Turkish promises. The fact 
was that the despotism of the Sultan no longer existed except in 
name. ‘Turkey was practically ruled by an official obligarchy, 
and the personal will of the nominal ruler counted for very little 
when it clashed with the interests of the dominant class. <A series 
of revolts in the Christian provinces attested the continuance of 
Turkish oppression and of the discontent which it could hardly fail 
to provoke. The most important of these revolts before 1875 was 
that of Crete (1866-1868), which was almost openly countenanced 
by the Greek government. Diplomatic relations between Constan- 
tinople and Athens were broken off, and war would probably have 
ensued if the European powers had not stepped in to compel Greece 
to observe a strict neutrality. The insurrection was put down in 
1868, mainly by the exertions of Hobart Pasha, an English naval 
officer who had entered the Turkish service, and Crete, with some 
nominal concessions, returned to its former servitude. 

§ 9. In 1875 an insurrection in Herzegovina and Bosnia raised 
a storm in the whole of Turkey, and made the eastern question for 
three years the centre of European politics. Volunteers from 
Montenegro and Servia came to the assistance of the insurgents. 
Austria, with its large Slav population, was at first inclined to 
sympathise with the movement, and took the lead in procuring 
diplomatic intervention on its behalf. Count Andrassy, the foreign 
minister of Austro-Hungary, drew up a note in December in which 


A.D. 1861—1876. RISINGS IN TURKEY. 749 


he enumerated the concessions which the Porte ought to make to. 
its Christian subjects. ‘he “Andrassy Note” was accepted by 
Russia, Austria, France, Italy, and after some hesitation by England, 
and it was presented to the Porte by Count Zichy on January 81, 
1876. The Turkish ministry undertook to make the proposed 
reforms, but the insurgents refused to accept them unless the 
European powers offered a practical guarantee for their execution. 
The note thus failed of its purpose, and the zeal of Austria 
perceptibly cooled as the Hungarians, who had never forgotten the 
conduct of Russia in 1849, showed unmistakeable hostility to the 
cause of the Slavs. A more energetic document, the “Berlin 
Memorandum,” was now drawn up, and threatened active coercion 
unless the concessions were made within two months. But England, 
where Lord Beaconsfield’s ministry was returning to the attitude of 
the Crimean war, refused to accept the Memorandum, which thus 
became futile. Meanwhile matters in the east were daily becoming 
more serious. Bulgaria joined the insurrection, but the Bulgarians 
were not a warlike race, and their rising was suppressed by Turkish 
irregular troops with a wanton barbarity that raised a storm of 
indignation in Europe and especially in England. In Constantinople 
Abdul Aziz was deposed on May 30, and was murdered a few days 
later. His successor, Amurath V., was a hopeless idiot, and was 
deposed on August 31, in favour of his brother Abdul Hamid II. 
Servia and Montenegro had already declared war against the Porte 
(July 1 and 2). Against the hardy mountaineers of Montenegro 
the. Turks failed to gain any successes, but the Servians were 
completely defeated at Alexinatz (October 31). An armistice was 
now concluded to give a new opening for the efforts of diplomacy. 
It was impossible for the son of Nicolas to look quietly on 
while the Slavs of Servia, Bosnia, and Herzegovina were crushed 
by Turkey. Alexander II. was compelled by the excited feeling 
of the Russian people to return to his father’s policy which had 
been so long deserted. The alliance of the three emperors seemed 
to secure him against opposition from Germany and Austria, in 
spite of the Hungarian agitation in the latter country. France and 
Italy were eager for a Russian alliance, the one to get its revenge 
upon Germany, the other in the hope of annexing the Trentino. 
The English ministry was hostile to Russia, but the agitation 
ahout the “ Bulgarian atrocities ” during the parliamentary recess 
had made a great impression on public opinion, and a reaction in 
favour of the Liberals would secure the Czar in that quarter. In 
October Alexander threatened the Porte with immediate war unless 
a truce of two months were concluded. Hostilities now ceased, and 
a conference of ministers, at which England was represented by 


750 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. xxvurt. 


Lord Salisbury, met at Constantinople (Dic. 23, 1876). Midhat 
Pasha, the Jeader of the reforming party, had been in power since 
the deposition of Abdul Aziz, and it was hoped that he would meet 
the wishes of the powers half-way. The conference drew up a 
number of reforms, and demanded that the powers should supervise 
their execution, and should have a voice in the appointment of 
provincial governors. ‘The Porte refused to make such a sacrifice 
of its independence, and the conference broke up (Jan. 20, 1877). 
Midhat Pasha was driven from office and banished. 

§ 10. In face of the obstinacy of the Turkish government, Russia 
had no difficulty in obtaining assurances of neutrality from the 
other powers, and at once prepared for war. In April, Alexander JI. 
joined his army in person, and issued a manifesto announcing his 
intention to obtain “such securities for his fellow-Christians on 
Turkish soil as were absolutely necessary for their future welfare.” 
A convention with Roumania secured the Russians free passage 
through that province. Prince Charles seized the opportunity to 
declare his independence of Turkish suzerainty (May 22), and 
joined the Czar at the head of a Roumanian army. Without 
meeting with serious opposition, the Russians crossed the Danube 
at two points, near Galacz and at Sistowa (June 21-28), and the 
general expectation prevailed that the campaign would be brought 
to a speedy conclusion. But the Turkish soldiers showed that they 
had not lost the military prowess which had once made them the 
terror of Europe. Osman Pasha repulsed two attacks cf vastly 
superior forces upon the fortress of Plevna (July 380 and Sept. 11). 
The siege was now turned into a blockade, but it was not till 
November 10 that the heroic garrison was starved into surrender, 
after a desperate attempt to cut their way through the besieging 
forces. In Asia, the fortress of Kars was taken on Nov. 18. 
Servia and Montenegro had followed the example of Roumania in 
declaring their independence. The Russians were masters of Bul- 
garia, and prepared to follow up their success by crossing the 
Balkans. <A force of 80,000 men blocked the Schipka Pass, but the 
Russians found another passage, took the Turks in the rear, and 
compelled them to capitulate (Jan. 10, 1878). A few days later 
General Gourko defeated Suleiman Pasha in Roumelia. ‘The Russian 
vanguard, under the Czar’s brother Nicolas, entered Adrianople with- 
out opposition on January 19. 

The advance of the Russians to the neighbourhood of Constantino- 
ple alarmed the English ministers, and Admiral Hornby was ordered 
to take the English fleet to the Dardanelles. But it was too late to 
exert much influence on the course of events. A truce had been con- 
cluded at Adrianople on January 31, and the preliminary treaty of 


A.D. 1876—1878. TREATY OF BERLIN. 751 


San Stefano was accepted by Turkey on March 3. Roumania, Servia, 
and Montenegro were to be recognised as independent and to receive 
an increase of territory. Bulgaria, with boundaries reaching from 
the Black Sea to the Aigean, was to be formed into an autonomous 
but tributary state. Turkey was to pay an indemnity of 14 million 
roubles, but 10 millions were to be compounded for by cessions in 
Asia, which included Batoum, Erzeroum, and Kars. Russia was to 
recover the strip of Bessarabia that had been ceded by the treaty of 
Paris, and Roumania was to be compensated with the Dobrudscha. 
§ 11. The treaty of San Stefano was regarded with grave mis- 
givings by England, and the government demanded that it should 
be submitted to a Huropean Congress. Russia consented to this as 
regards those articles which concerned the general interests of 
Europe, but refused to allow the discussion of the whole treaty. On 
this point negotiations came to a standstill, and both countries pre- 
pared seriously for war. But the exertions of Count Schouwaloff, 
the Russian ambassador in London, at last succeeded in effecting a 
compromise. A written agreement was drawn up as to the main 
points which were to be submitted to the Congress, which met at 
Berlin on June 18 under the presidency of Prince Bismarck. 
Austria was represented by Andrassy, Russia by Gortschakoff and 
Schouwaloff, and England by Lords Beaconsfield and Salisbury. The 
preliminary agreement helped to smooth matters, and the treaty of 
Berlin was signed on July 18. Its chief result was to soften down 
those articles of the treaty of San Stefano which bore most hardly 
on the Porte. The independence of Roumania, Serviaand Monte- 
negro was confirmed, but the proposed increase of their territories 
was diminished. ‘lhe exchange of the Dobrudscha for the strip of 
Bessarabia was confirmed, to the great disgust of Roumania, which 
had rendered loyal service to Russiain the war. The huge province of 
“ Bulgaria ” which the treaty of San Stefano proposed to create, was 
divided into two parts. Bulgaria proper was to form an autonomous 
but tributary state, under a prince to be elected by a national assembly 
and approved by the powers. Eastern Roumelia,on the other hand, 
was to remain subject to Turkey, with a certain amount of administra- 
tive autonomy, and was to be ruled by a Christian governor, nomi- 
nated every five years by the Sultan and confirmed by the powers. 
Josnia and Herzegovina, which had been left untouched by the treaty 
of San Stefano out of regard for Austria, were néw handed over to 
Austrian occupation antil they could receive a reformed: administra- 
tion under the guarantee of the powers. ‘The free navigation of the 
Danube was confirmed, and the fortresses on its banks were to be razed, 
the existing arrangements about the Dardanelles and the Bosphorus 
were left unaltered. In Asia Russia resigned Erzeroum, but kept 


752 MODERN EUROPE. CHAP. XXVIII. 


Batoum and Kars. The Porte undertook to introduce reforms 
under the superintendence of the powers, and to grant complete 
political equality to all its subjects, without any regard to their 
religion, but no support was given to Russia’s claim of a special pro- 
tectorate over the Greek Christians. All other articles of the San 
Stefano treaty, including that of the indemnity, were left to be 
settled in a new agreement between Russia and Turkey. The 
question of Greece was brought before the congress, but no very 
definite conclusion was come to. ‘The powers recommended the 
Porte to grant Greece a rectified frontier, and reserved their right 
of future mediation on the subject. A convention was now made 
public which had been concluded between England and Turkey on 
June 4, ten days before the meeting of the Congress. In order to 
reconcile the Porte to the cession of Batoum and Kars, England 
undertook to guarantee the remaining possessions of Turkey in Asia. 
The Sultan, on his part, undertook to introduce such reforms as 
should be agreed upon, and handed over the island of Cyprus to be 
occupied and administered by England. Lord Beaconsfield returned 
to England with the proud assertion that he had brought back 
‘peace with honour.” History has yet to show whether this boast 
was justified, and whether the treaty of Berlin provided more than 
a temporary settlement of the Eastern Question.? 


1 Since this was written, events have occurred in Eastern Roumelia 
which seem likely to annul one very important article of the treaty, the 
subdivision of Bulgaria, 


Abd-el-Kader. 


A. 


Ahd-el-Kader, 678. 

Abdul Aziz,748. Deposed,749. 

Abdul Hamid 1., sultan, 449, 
463. 

IL., 749. 

Abdul Medjid, 741, 742, 743 
Death of, 748. 

Abo, treaty of, 389. 

Aboukir, battle of, 567. 

Academy, the French, found- 
ed by Richelieu, 159. 

Achmet I., Turkish sultan, 
201. 

IL, 213. 

Ackermann, convention of, 
655. 

Acquaviva, general of the 
Jesuits, 181. 

Adolf Frederick, of Sweden, 
389. Marries sister of 
Frederick the Great, 390. 

Adrian V1., pope, 47. 

Advianople, treaty of, 657. 

/Enexas Sylvius, 9 (see Pius 
Tiny: 


Affre, Monseigneur, 684. 
Death of, 686. 

Agnadello, battle of, 41. 

Aigues-Mortes, interview at, 
a5: 

Aix-la-Chapelle, treaty of 
(1668), 179,221. Do. (1748), 
384, 385. 
(1818), 640. 

Alais, treaty of, 155. 

Alberoni, cardinal, 297, 299, 
300. Fall of, 301. 

Albert, the archduke, 731. 

Albert of Brandenburg, forms 
duchy of Prussia, 63, 323. 

of Brandenburg, allied 
with Maurice of Saxony, 
86. Assists Charles V. at 
Metz, 87. Attacked by 
Maurice, 88. Retires to 
France, 89. 

Albert I[II., of Bavaria, 131. 

Albizzi, Rinaldo, 10. 

Albornoz, cardinal, 9. 

Albret, house of, in Navarre, 
26. 

Albuera, battle of, 614. 

Alcacer, battle of, 104. 

Alexander VI., pope, 10, 31. 


INDEX. 


———_+Oor-—— 


Alexander I., of Russia, 577, 
586. Joins coalition against 
Napoleon, 586. Defeated 
at Austerlitz, 590. eCon- 
cludes treaty of Tilsit with 
Napoleon, 598. Interview 
at Erfurt, 606. Alienated 
from France, 612, 615. 
Allied with Prussia, 619. 
Attitude towards France, 
627, 633. Forms the Holy 


Alliance, 638. Attitude 
towards Greece, 650. 
Death of, 648, 653. 

—— IL} of Russia, 744: 


Emancipates the serfs, 746. 
Suppresses the Polish re- 
volt, 746. Involved in 
war with Turkey, 749, 750. 

Alexandria, capitulation of, 
578. 

Alexinatz, battle of, 749. 

Alexis, Czar of Russia, 193. 

son of Peter the Great, 
285. 

Alessandria, convention of, 
bid. 

Alfonso I. of Naples and 
V. of Aragon, 8. 

II., of Naples, acces- 
sion of, 35. Abdication, 36. 

Alfonso XII., «f Spain, 733, 
139. 

Algiers, pirate state of, 73. 


Congress of} Attacked by Charles V., 
77 


Ali Pasha, of Jannina, 649, 
650, 651. 

Alkmaar, seige of, 110. 

Alma, battle of the, 744. 

Almanza, battle of, 255. 

Altmark, truce of, 190. 

Altranstadt, Charles XII. at, 
255, 274,275. ‘Treaty of, 
275. 

Alva, the duke of, com- 
mands in Italy against 
Paul 1V., 91. Sent to the 
Netherlands, 108. Cruelty 
of his rule, 7b. He puts 
down opposition, 109. 
His financial schemes, 7b, 
His recall, 110. 

Amadens, of Spain, 738. 

Amboise, conspiracy of, 116. 
Peace of, 118. 


Treaty with Charles VIII., | Amboise, George of, minister 


35. Alliance with Louis 

LL. oS 

Death, 40. 
— VII., 219. 


of Louis XIL., 3%. 


Nepotism of, ib.| American colonies, revolt 


of, 481. 
486. 


Independence of, 


Arenberg. 


Amiens, treaty of, 578. 

Amurath III., Turkish sul 
tan, 201. 

— IV., 202. 

—— V., 749. 


Anabaptists in Miinster, 81 4 


Ancona, French occupation 
of, 671. 

Andrassy, count, 748, 751. 

Andrussov, truce of,198, 204 

Anhalt-Dessau, Leopold of 
280, 328, 343, 365, 373. 

——., Leopold of (the 
younger), 343. 

Angouléme, the duke of 
640, 647. 

Anjou, Francis, duke of, in 
the Netherlands, 112, 123 
Proposed as husband for 
Elizabeth of England, 120 
123. Death of, 123. 

Anne of Austria, married to 
Louis XITI., 152. Con- 
cerned in plot against 
Richelieu, 154. Regency 
of, 161. Relations with 
Mazarin, ib. Conduct in 
the Fronde, 164. 

Anne of Beaujeu, regent in 
France, 25. 

Anne of Brittany, marries 
Charles VIII., 25. Mar- 
ries Louis XII., 38. 

Aune, regent of Holland, 399. 

Anne of Mecklenburg, regent 
in Russia, 387. Exiled,38s. 

Anne, of Russia, 287. Snup- 
ports Augustus III., 316. 
War with Turkey, 320. 
Domestic government, 
386. Death of, 386. 

Annese, Gennaro, 178, 179. 

Antonelli, cardinal, 693. 


Antonio, prior of Crato, 
claims crown of Portugal, 
104, 105. 


Antony of Bourbon, 115. 
Gained over by the Catho- 
lic party, 117. Killed at 
Rouen, 118. 

Apasi, prince of Transyl- 
vania, 203, 204, 207, 212. 

Apraxin, Russian general, 
407, 413, 415. 

Aragon, liberties of, sup- 
pressed, 103. 

Aranjuez, treaty of, 395. 

Arcola, battle of, 558. 

Arcos, the duke of, 177. 

Arenberg, Austrian general, 
361, 365, 368, 


a“ 


a 
> 


754 
Arras. 


Arras, treaty of (1435), 22. 
Treaty of (1482), 24. 

Artois, ceded to Louis XI., 
24. Restored by Charles 
VIIL, 25. Annexed to 
France by treaty of the 
Pyrenees, 17). 

Artois, count of, 491, 492, 
493. Flight of, 498. At- 
tempts to form coalition 
against France, 517, 518. 
Plots of, 552, 584, Re- 
turns to Paris, 627. Atti- 
tude under Louis XVIIT., 
639, 640. Succeeds to the 
crown, 658 (see Charles X.). 

Aspern, battle of, 608. 

Aspromonte, battle of, 725. 

Assignats, the, 509, 552, 554. 

Auerstadt, battle of, 594. 

Augereau, general, 561. 

Augsburg, confession of, 63. 
Religious peace of, 89, 130. 
League of, 237. 

Augustenburg, duke of, 691. 

Augustenburg, Frederick of, 
726, 728.* 

Augustus IT. (the Strong), of 
Saxony and Poland, 192, 
270, 272. Deposed in Po- 
land, 273, 274. Recovers 
the crown, 277. Death of, 
315. 

— IIL, of Saxony, obtains 
Polish crown, 316, 333. 
Claiin to Austrian succes- 
sion, 310. Joins league 
against Maria ‘Theresa, 
345. Concludes _ treaty 
with Austria, 351. Re- 
news the Austrian alli- 
ance, 368, 371. Attacked 
by Prussians, 373. Con- 
cludes treaty of Dresden, 
374, Driven from Sax- 
ony, 406. Recovers his 
territories by peace of 
Hubertsburg, 428. Death 
of, 442. 

Augustus William, brother 
of Frederick the Great, 
411, 459. 

Austerlitz, battle of, 559. 

Avignon, papal residence in, 
2, 9. Seized by Louis 
XIV., 219. Restored to 
the papacy, 244. An- 
nexed to France, 516, 627. 

Azof, acquired by Russia, 
214. Restored to Turkey, 
279. Recovered by 
Russia, 322. 


B. 


Babceu*, conspiracy of, 554, 

Badajoz, taken by Welling- 
ton, 614 : 

Baden, treaty of, 261 Grand 
duchy of, 591. 


INDEX. 


Bagnolo, treaty of, 14. 
Bailly, 493. Mayor of Paris, 


498, 499, 514. Resigns 
his office, 520. Death of, 
545, 


Bajazet II., 31. 

Balaclava, battle of, 744. 

Baltadschi, Mehemet, 278, 
279. 

Baner, Swedish general, 146, 
148, 149. 

Bar, confederation of, 445. 

Barbarossa, commander of 
Turkish fleet, 73, 199. 
Ravages coast of Naples, 


5. 

Barhesieux, 241. Death of, 
249: 

Barcelona, treaty of, 25. 


Treaty of, between Charles 
V. and Clement VII., 51. 
Barclay de Tolly, 617, 621. 
Barenklau, 349. 
Barere, 536, 541, 542, 547, 
549, 550. 
Barlaymont, 106, 1C8. 
Barnave, 502, 511, 515, 528. 
Barras, 549, 553, 561, 568. 
Bart, Jean, 241. 
Bartenstein, John Christo- 
pher, 320. 
Bartenstein, treaty of, 597. 
Barthelemy, 560, 561. 
Basel, treaty of, 551. Dis- 
putes in, 670. 
Bastille, taking of the, 497. 


Batavian Republic, 581, 587. 


Bathori, Stephen, elected 
king of Poland, 186. War 
with Russia, 187. 

Bautzen, battle of, 621. 

Bavaria becomes an elector- 
ate, 138, 150. Kingdom 
of, 591. 

Bavarian Succession, 451. 

Baylen, capitulation of, 603. 

Bayonne, conference of, 118. 

Bazaine, Marshal, 732, 735. 

Beaconsfield, Lord, 749, 751, 
152. 

Beaufort, the duke of, 161, 
165, 168. 

Beaujeu, Anne of, regent in 
France, 25. 

Bed of Justice, 162. 

Beggars, the, origin of the 
name, 108. 

Belgium, conquered by 
French, 534. United to 
Holland, 631. Indepen- 
dence of, 664-667. 

Belgrad, relief of, 19. Taken 
by the Turks, 199. Cap- 
tured by imperial troops, 
212. Kecovered by the 
Turks, 213. Battle of, 
316. Ceded to Austria, 
th. Recovered by the 
Turks, 321, 322. 

Belleisle, marshal, 314, 345, 


_ Bomba, 
348, 353, 357, 380, 383, 409, 
418. 

Bender, Charles XII. at, 277, 
278, 305. 

Benedetti, 734. : 

Benedict XIV., pope, 435. 

Bennigsen, Russian com- 
mander, 596. 

Beresford, 614, 642, 643. 

Beresina, passage of the, 618. 

Bergerac, Edict of, 122. 

Berlin, treaty of (1742), 351. 
Congress of, 751. Treaty 
of (1878), 751. 

Berlin decree, the, 595. 

Bernadotte, 568, 590. 
Adopted as heir to Charles 
XITL. of Sweden, 599, 616. 
Conduct in the war of 

liberation, 621, 622, 623. 
Obtains the cession of 
Norway to Sweden, 624. 

Bernhard of Saxe-Weimar, 
143, 146. Defeated at 
Nordlingen, 147.  Con- 
quers Elsuss, 149. Death, 
1b. 

Bernis, Abbé de, 401, 409, 
420. 

Berry, the duchess of, 641, 
662. Adventures under 
Louis Philippe, 674, 675. 

Berry, the duke of, 264. 

——, the duke of, assassi- 
nated, 640. 

Berryer, 676. 

Berthier, 499. 

Berwick, the duke of, 255, 
301, 318. 

Bestoujef, Russian 
cellor, 389, 405, 407. 
of, 415. 

Bethlen Gabor, prince of 
Transylvania, 135, 137, 
139, 140. 

Beust, count, 731. 

Beza, Theodore, 72. 

Bicocca, battle of, 47. 

Billaud-Varennes, 542, 546, 
547, 548, 549, 550. 

Biren, duke of Courland, 386, 
441, 

Bismarck, 708. Prussian 
minister, 727, 728, 729. 
Chancellor of the North 
German _ Confederation, 
730. Imperial Chancellor, 
737. Presides at the Con- 
gress of Berlin, 751. 

Blanc, Louis, 682, 684, 685, 
686. 

Blanqui, 682, 685, 686. 

Blenheim, battle of, 253. 

Blticher, Marshal, 594, 622, 
623, 624, 632, 633. 

Blum, Robert, 702. 

Bolingbroke, viscount, 259, 
260. 

Bomba, king (sce Ferdinand 
II. of the Two Sicilies). 


chan- 
Fall 


Bona. 


Bona of Savoy, married to 
Galeazzo Sforza, 7. Re- 
gent in Milan, 8. 

Bonaparte, Jerome, 585, 592. 
King of Westphalia, 598. 
Flight of, 624. 

Bonaparte, Louis, 585. Made 
king of Holland, 592. Re- 
signs, 611. 

Bonaparte, Lucien, 568, 585. 

Bonaparte, Joseph, 564, 585. 
King of Naples, 592. King 
of Spain, 603, 612, 613, 614. 
Lxpelled, 625. 

Bonaparte, Napoleon, 543, 
553. - Italian campaign 
(1796), 555-558. Invades 
Austria, 559. Threatens 
Venice, 7b. Attitude on the 
18th Fructidor, 561. Con- 
cludes treaty of Campo 
Formio, 562. Egyptian ex- 
pedition, 563, 567. Returns 
to France, 567, 568. Coup 
@etat of 18th Brumaire, 
568. Becomes First Con- 
sul, 570. Marengo cam- 
paign, 574,575. Concludes 
treaties of Lunéville, 576, 
and Amiens, 578. Consul 
for life, 581. Renews the 
war with England, 583. 
Murders the duke of 
Enghien, 585. Becomes 
Emperor of the French, 
585 (see Napoleon I.). 

Bonnivet, commands the 
French in Lombardy, 48. 

Borgia, Rodrigo, 10 (see 
Alexander VI.). 

Borgia, Cesar, 36. Conquers 
Romagna, 40. Death, tb. 

Boria, Catharine, marries 
Luther, 62. 

Borodino, battle of, 617. 

Borromeo, Carlo, archbishop 
of Milan, 98, 99. 

Botta, the marquis, 378, 380, 
389. 

Boufflers, marshal, 240, 243, 
251, 257. 

Bouillé, 513, 514. 

Boulogne, taken by English, 
73. Restored to France, 7b. 

Bourbon, cardinal of, 124. 
Proclaimed king, 125. 
Death, ib. 

Bourbon, the constable of, 48. 
Deserts Francis I., 7b. 
Killed at the siege of 
Rome, 50. 

Bourbon, the duke of, 294. 
Minister of Louis XV., 
302, 303. 

Bourmont, general, 659. 

Boyne, battle of the, 240. 

Braddock, general, 397. 

Braganza, Catharine of, 
married to Charles II. of 
England, 179. 


INDEX. 


Braganza, house of, claims 
Portugal, 104. Obtains the 
crown, 177, 220. Expelled 
by Napoleon, 608. 

Brandenburg, count, 
Death of, 708. 

Bravo, Gonzalez, 733. 

Brazil, empire of, 643. 

Breda, peace of, 219. 

Brederode, 108. 

Breitenfeld, battle of, 144. 

Breslau, treaty of, 345. Pre- 
liminaries of (1742), 351. 

Breton Club, the, 502. Be- 
comes the Jacobin Club, 
506. 

Briconnet, Guillaume, 34. 

Brienne, Lomenie de, 480, 
489. 

Brihuega, battle of, 259. 

Brill, seized by the “sea 
beggars,” 110. 

Brissot, 520, 522, 531, 541, 

Broglie, the duke of, 418, 
423, 424, 426, 495. 

—,, duke of, 674, 711, 

, Marshal, 349, 352, 357. 

Broémsebro, treaty of, 185. 
Second treaty of(1643),191. 

Broussel, arrest of, 164. Re- 
leased, ib. Made Provost 
of the Merchants, 168. 

Browne, Austrian general, 
378, 280, 405, 406. Death 
of, 411. 

Briibl, count, 368. 

Bromaire, coup d’état of the 
18th, 568. 

Brunswick, the duke of, 527, 
594, 

Bucharest, treaty of, 616. 

Buckingham, duke of, 155. 

Bucquoi, Austrian comman- 
der in Bohemia, 136. 

Budziak, treaty of, 204. 

Bulgaria, 749. Subdivided 
by treaty of Berlin, 751, 

Biilow, 623, 624. 

Burgundy, duchy of, 22. 
Annexed by France, 24. 
Burgundy, county of, 24 (see 

Franche-Comte). 

Burgundy, the duke of, 256. 
Death of, 264. 

Burgundy, house of, 22. 

Burrard, Sir Harry, 603. 

Busaco, battle of, 613. 

Bute, lord, 425, 426. 

Buzot, 502, 545, 

Byng, admiral, 300, 399, 400. 

Byron, lord, 652. 


C. 


Cabrera, 679. 

Cadoudal, Georges, 584. 

Cajetan, cardinal, 55. 

Calabria, Alfonso of, 9. In 
Siena, 14 (see Alfonso 
IL. of Naples). 


701. 


755 


Castelar. 
Calabria, John of, ciaims 
Naples, 8. Goes to Cata- 
lonia, 26. Death, 7b. 
Calais, recovered by France, 
91 


Calderon, 176. 

Calendar, the Republican, 
545. Abolished, 592. 

Calixtus III., pope, 9. 

Calmar, union of, 66. 

Calonne, 487, 488. 

Calvin, John, 70. Exiled 
from Geneva, 71. Return, 
tb, Character of teaching 
of, ib. Death, 72. 

Calvinists, excluded. from 
treaty of Augsburg, 89. 

Cambacéres, 570, 585, 620, 
631. 

Cambray, league of, 41. 
Treaty of (1529),51. Con- 
gress of, 307. 

Campeggio, cardinal, 60. 

Camperdown, battle of, 563. 

Campo Formio,treaty of, 562 

Canada, ceded to Ingland, 
428. 

Candia, war of, 180, 202, 204, 

Canning, 597, 647,648. At- 
titude towards Greece, 652, 
654, 655. Death of, 655. 

Cape of Good Hope, ceded to 
England, 627. 

Capistrano, 19. 

Capo d’Jstria, count, 650. 
President in Greece, 656. 
Death of, 657. 

Cappel, treaties of, 65. 

Capponi, Piero, 35. 

Caraffa, cardinal, 
(see Paul IV.). 

Carbonari, the, 644, 670, 718. 

Carlos, Don, son of Philip 
II., 104. 

Carlos, Don, son of Philip V. 
of Spain, 299.. Receives 
Parma and Piacenza, 315. 
Exchanges the duchies for 
Naples and Sicily, 319. 
Forced to be neutral in 
Austrian Succession War, 
356. Becomes King of 
Spain, 423 (see Charles 
IL. of Spain). 

Carlos, Don, brother of Fer- 
dinand VIL. 679. 

Carlos, Don, the younger, 
733, 738. 

Carlowitz, treaty of, 180, 214. 

Carlsbad, edicts of, 638, 669. 

Carlstadt, 58. Teaching to 
the peasants, 60. 

Carnot, 542, 544, 551. Be- 
comes a director, 553, 560. 
Attacked on 18th Fruc- 
tidor, 561. 

Carrier, 547, 548, 550. 

Carteret, 350. 

Cassel, battle of, 228, 

Castelar, 738, 


94, 96 


756 
Castel. 


Castel Fidardo, battle of, 723. 

Castelnaudari, battle of, 157. 

Castlereagh, 628, 637. Death 
of, 647. 

Castro, war of, 182. 

Catalonia, revolt of (1640), 
gives 

Cateau-Cambresis, treaty of, 
92. 

Catharine of Aragon, 28. 
Divorced by Henry VIII., 
44 


Catharine I., wife of Peter 
the Great, 279, 285. Be- 
comes Czarina, 286, 312. 

— II, of Russia, 390, 427, 
439. Attitude towards 
Poland, 441, 442. Secures 
the Polish crown for Sta- 
nislaus Poniatowski, 443. 
Arranges the Partition, 
448. War with Turkey, 
446. Concludes treaty of 
Kainardji, 449. Alliance 
with Joseph II., 456, 461. 
Second Turkish war, 461. 
Concludes peace at Jassy, 
466. Suppresses the Polish 
constitution, 468. Ar- 
ranges Second Partition, 


469. Makes final parti- 
tion, 471. Forms the 
Armed Neutrality, 483. 


Death of, 472, 564. 
Catinat, 240, 242, 250, 251. 
Cavaignac, general, 686, 709. 

Candidate for the Presi- 

dency, 710. 

Cavalier, 251, 255. 

Cavour, Camillo, 717, 718. 
Interview with Napoleon 
ill., 719. Resigns office, 
721. Again minister, 7b. 
Quarrel with Garibaldi, 
722. Secures the two 
Sicilies, 723. Death of, 724. 

Cayla, madame du, 641. 

Cazales, 501. 

Cerignola, battle of, 39. 

Cerisoles, battle of, 78. 

Cervantes, 176. 

Cevennes, rising in the, 251. 

Chaise, Pére la, 233. 

Chambord, count of, 713. 

Chamillart, 249, 256. 

Changarnier, general, 
(aes 

Charles, archduke of Aus- 
tria, 245. Proclaimed as 
Charles III. of Spain, 254. 
Iriven from Castile, 255, 
259. Becomes emperor, 
259 (see Charies VI.). 

, the archduke, 557, 559, 
565, 573, 589, 607, 608. 
Defeated at Wagram, 609. 

Charles, duke of Berry, 22. 
Becomes duke of Guienne, 
23. Death, 7b. 

——, the Bold, duke of Bur- 


RL1; 


Charles I., 


INDEX, 


gundy, 22. 
23. War with the Swiss 
and death, 24. - 


Charles V., emperor, elect*on 
with |—— X., of France, 655. 


of, 46. Rivalry 
Francis I., %b. Forms 
alliance with Henry VIII. 
and Leo X., 47. Extorts 
treaty of Madrid from 
Francis, 49. Concludes 
treaties of Cambray and 
Barcelona, 51. Attitude 
towards religion, 57. At 


the diet of Augsburg 
(1529), 63. War with the 
Turks, 64. Intervention 


in Algiers, 73. Invades 
France, 75. Suppresses 
Castilian Cortes, 76. Puts 
down a revolt in Ghent, zb. 
Disastrous expedition to 
Algiers, 77. Concludes 
treaty of Crespy, 78. Pre- 
pares toattack the German 
Protestants, 82. Makes 
war on the League of 
Schmalkalde, 83. Quarrels 
with Paul III., 84. Issues 
the Interim, 85. Attacked 
by Maurice of Saxony, 86. 
Besieges Metz, 87. Abdi- 


cates, 90. Death at San 
Juste, 7b. : 
— VI., emperor, 259. 


Concludes treaty of Ra- 
stadt, 261. Joins the Quad- 
ruple Alliance, 299. Kx- 
changes Sardinia for Sicily, 
301, 305. Reign of, 304- 
322. Assists Venice against 
the Turks, 305. Concludes 
treaty of Passarowitz, 306. 
Issues the Pragmatic Sanc- 
tion, 308. Founds the 
Ostend Company, 309. 


Charles. 


His schemes, | Charles IX., of France, 117, 


120. Conduct in the mas- 
sacre of St. Bartholomew, 
121. Death, 122. 


Reign of, 658-662. Death 
of, 676 (see Artois, count 


of). 
Charles ITI., of Lorraine, 156. 


Restored to his duchy, 171. 
Expelied again, 222. 
Death of, 227. 


— IYV., of Lorraine, general 


in the imperial service, 
208, 2u9, 210, 211, 227, 228, 
229, 240. Death of, 213. 


— of Lorraine, brother-in- 


law of Maria Theresa, 349. 
Defeated at Chotusitz, 350. 
Commands on the Rhine, 
358, 359. Invades Alsace, 
361. Retreats from the 
Rhine, 365. Campaign in 
Bohemia, ib. Defeated at 
Hohenfriedberg, 370, and 
at Soor, 372. Defeated at 
Raucoux, 380. 


Charles of Maine, 33. 
Charles III, of Savoy, 69 


Expelled by the French,74.° 
Fails to regain his duchy 
by treaty of Crespy, 78. 


Charles I., of Spain, acces- 


sion, 28 (see Charles Y., 
emperor). 


— IL, of Spain, 179, 220, 


244. Will of, 246, 247. 
Death of, 247. 

IIL, of Spain, 423. Re- 
news Family Compact 
with France, 426. Govern- 
ment of, 434. Banishes 
the Jesuits, 436. Death of, 
437. Joins France against 
England, 452. 


Conduct in the Polish suc- |! Charles IV. of Spain, 538,576, 


cession, 317. Exchanges 


601. Abdication of, 602. 


Naples and Sicily for Par- | Charles of Styria, 135. 


ma, 319. Death of, 322. 


Charles VII., emperor, 349. 


Driven from Bavaria, 7b. | 
Recovers Bavaria, 352. | 
Again expelled, 357. Joins | 


— X., of Sweden, 


Charles [X., of Sweden, 129, 


185, 188, 189. 
192. 
War with Poland, 193, 


194. Death of, 195. 


Union of Frankfort, 362.; —— XI., of Sweden, 196, 


Again restored, 366. Death 
ot, 367. 

of England, 
marries Henrietta Maria, 
138. Fails to support 
Christian IV., 146. 


— II., of England, marries 


Catharine of Braganza, 
179. Sells Dunkirk to 
France, 219. Concludes 
treaty of Dover, 222. 


Suc- 


‘ 


tion to Naples, 34. 
cess, 36. Death, 38. 


270. War with Denmark 
and Pomerania, 197. Es- 
tablishes absolutism, 7b. 
Death of, 198. 


— XII.of Sweden, 198,255, 


271. Warwith Denmark, 
272. War with Russia, 
272, 276, 277. War with 
Poland, 272-275. Camp 
at Altranstadt, 274. —Re- 
sidence at Bender, 27x, 


Charles VII., of France, 22. 279. Return to Sweden, 
— Il., of France, ac- 280. Death of, 282. 
cession of, 25. Expedi- | —— XIIL., of Sweden, 599, 


Charles of Viana, son of 


John II. of Aragon, 26. 


Charles. 


Charles Albert, of Bavaria, 
claims Austria, 339, 340. 
Allied with France against 
Maria Theresa, 345, 348. 
Hlectid emperor, 349 (see 
Charles VII., emperor). 

Charles Albert, of Sardinia, 
644, 646. Succeeds to the 
throne, 671. Mule of, 691, 
692, 693. First war with 
Austria, 693, 694. Second 
war, 699. Abdication of, 
700. 

Charles Emanuel I.,of Savoy, 
183. Acquires Saluzzo, ib. 

IT., of Savoy, 184. 

— IIL., of Savoy, 317, 318. 
Obtains Novara and Tor- 
tona, 319. ‘Attitude in 
Austrian succession, 34/, 
355, 356. Concludes the 
treaty of Worms, 359. 
Conduct in the war, 375, 
378, 380. Negotiates with 
France, 376, 377. Accepts 
treaty of Aix-la-Chapelle, 
335, 

{V., of Sardinia, 565. 
Charles Felix, of Sardinia, 
644, 646. Death of, 671. 
Charles Lewis, son of Fred- 
erick V., recovers Palatine 

electorate, 150. 

Charles Louis, of Lucca, 630, 
692. 

Charles Theodore, Elector Pa- 
latine, 451. Obtains electo- 
rate of Bavaria, ib. Treaty 
with Joseph Ll., 457. 

Charter, the French, 628. 

Chassé, general, 666. 

Chateauroux, duchess of, 360. 

Chatelineau, 539, 543. 

Chatham, lord, 610. 

Chatillon, family of, 116. 

Chatillon, congress of, 626. 

Chaumette, 538, 546. 

Chaumont, treaty of, 626. 

Chauvelin, 538. 

Cherasco, treaty of, 143, 183. 

Chevreuse, madame de, 161. 

Chiari, battle of, 250. 

Chilil Pasha, 306. 

Chlopicki, 667, 668. 

Choiseul, duke of, 420, 422, 
426. Government of, 433. 
Hostility to the Jesuits, 
436. Attitude in Pvlish 
question, 442, 445. Fall 
of, 433, 448. 

Chotusitz, battle of, 350. 

Chourchid Pasha, 651. 

Christian of Anhalt, minis- 
ter in the Palatinate, 133. 
Forms the Protestant 
Union, 134. Induces Fred- 
erick V. to accept Bohe- 
mian crown, 137. 

Christian of Brunswick, 137, 
139. Death of, 140. 


INDEX. 


757 
Corday. 


Christian II.,of Denmark, 66. | Cochrane, lord, 643, 653. 
Driven from the throne, 67, | Code Napoléon, 580. 


185. 


Cognac, league of, 50. 


— ]II., of Denmark, 67, | Cuhorn, 242, 243. 
185. Allied with France,77. | Coigni, 359, 361, 362, 365. 
— IV., of Denmark, inter- | Colbert, 216, 217, 222. Death 


vention in Germany, 139. 


Tefeated at Lutter, 140. | Coligny, 


Retires from the war, 141. 

Domestic government,185. 

First war with Sweden, 

188,189. Second war with 

Sweden, 191. 

V.,of Denmark, 197,198. 

— VI., of Denmark, 390. 

— VIIL., of Denmark, 690. 
Death of, 691. 

IX., of Denmark, 726, 
(Abe 

Christian I., of Saxony, 131. 

Christina, regent in Spain, 
679, 680. 

Christina of Sweden, acces- 
sion of, 146, 191. Abdica- 
tion of, 192. 

Chrzanowski, general, 699. 

Cia!dini, General, 723, 731. 

Cibo, Franceschetto, 10. 

Cinq-Mars, conspiracy of, 
158. 

Cintra, convention of, 603. 

Circles, German, 21. 

Cisalpine Republic, 558, 562, 
566, 581. 

Cispadane Republic, 558. 

Ciudai Rodrigo, stormed by 
Wellington, 614. 

Clement Vil., pope, 48. 
Quarrels with Charles V., 
49. Imprisoned by im- 
perial forces, 50. Makes 
peace with Charles, 51. 
Death, 74. 

—— VIL. pope, 127. 


of, 230. 

admiral de, 116. 
Defends St. Quentin, 91. 
Assumes command of the 
Huguenots, 118. Defeated 
at Moncontour, 120. Ob- 
tains influence at court, 7b. 
Assassinated, 121. 

Collot dHerbois, 530, 542, 
546, 547, 549, 550. 

Commines, Philippe de, em- 
bassy to Florence, 12. 
Embassy to Venice, 38. 

Commerce, influence upon 
Kuropean politics, 310. 


; Common Penny, 20. 


Commune, of Paris, 526, 546, 
548, 

Communes, ris‘ng of the, i 
Spain, 29. . 

Compromise, the, 108. 


| Concini, favourite of Mary de 


Medici, 152. Death of, 153. 

Concordat (of 1516) between 
Leo X. and Francis I., 43. 
Do. (of 1802), 580. Do. 
(of 1813), 620. 

Condé, Louis, prince of, 116. 
Taken prisoner at Dreux, 
118. Besieges Paris, 119. 
Killed at Jarnac, 120. 

Condé, the Great, 149. Con- 
duct during the Fronde, 
165-169. Enters service 
of Spain, 169, 170. Ke- 
stored to his property, 171. 
Campaigns of, 220,225,227. 

Condorcet, 520. 


— IX., pope, 181, 234.) Confederation, the German, 


Annexes Ferrara, 181. 
—— XL, pope, 262, 301, 302. 
—— XIII., pope, 435, 436, 

437. 

— XIV., pope, 437. Sup- 
presses the Jesuits, 7b. 
Clement Augustus, arch- 

bishop of Cologne, 238, 244, 

248, 251, 343. 

Clement, Jacques, assassi- 

nates Henry III., 125. 
Clermont, 415, 418. 
Clermont-Tonnerre, 492, 498, 

502. 

Cleve and Julich, disputed 

succession to, 134, 324. 
Clichy, club of, 560. 
Clissow, battle of, 273. 
Clive, Robert, 397, 418. 
Closter-Seven, convention of, 

412, 413. 

Cobenzl, Austrian minister, 

576. 

Coburg, the prince of, 544, 

550, 551. 


of 1815, 630. Attempts 
to reform it, 689-707. Re- 
storation of, 708. 
Confederation, North Ger- 
man, 730. 
Conflans, treaty of, 22. 
Constant, Benjamin, 572, 
640. 


Constantine, brother of Alex- 


Conduct in 
Death of, 


ander I., 653. 
Poland, 667. 
668. 


Constantinople, fall of, 2, 29. 


Treaty of, 14. 


Constituent Assembly, 501- 


516. 


Contarini, cardinal, 82, 93. 
Conti, the prince of, candi- 


date for Polish throne, 198. 
Convention, the, 529. 


Copenhagen, treaty of, 195. 


Bombarded by Nelson, 
577. Second bombardment 
* (1807), 599. 
Corday, Charlotte, 541, 


* 
758 
Cordeliers. 
Cordeliers, the club of, 546. 
Corfu, ceded to Venice, 306. 
Cornaro, Catharine da, 14. 
Corneille, 160. 
Corsica, sold to France, 433. 
Corunna, battle of, 607. 
Council of Blood, established 
by Alva, 108. 
Council of Regency, in Ger- 


many, 20. Revived, 46. 
Courland, duchy of, 187. 
Annexed to Russia, 472. 
Couthon, 520, 542, 546, 547, 
548, 549. 

Contras, battle of, 124. 

Crefeld, battle of, 418. 

Crell, chancellor of Saxony, 
131. 

Créqui, marshal, 227, 228, 
229 


Crespy, treaty of, 78. 

Crete, conquered by the 
Turks, 180. 

Crimea, ceded to Russia, 456. 

Crimean war, 743-745 

Cromwell, allied with France, 
170. Death of, 171. Re- 
lations with the north, 193. 

Cull :den, battle of, 379. 

Cumberland, the duke of, 
369, 382, 384, 412. 

Cumurgi, Ali, 305. 

Custine, 527, 534, 545. 


Custozza, battle of (1848), 664. 


Battle of (1866), 731. 
Cyprus, annexed to Venice, 
14. Conquered by the 
Turks, 291. Ceded_ to 
England, 752. 
Czartoriski, Adam, 667, 668. 


D. 


Dahlmann, 702, 707. 

D’ Aiguillon, 433, 477. 

Damiens, 409. 

Danton, 515, 525, 526. Or- 
ganises the September 
massacres, 527. Conduct 
in the Convention, 531, 
532, 539. In Belgium, 535, 
Attitude during theTerror, 
545,546. Death of, 547. 

Danzig, made a free state, 
598. 

D’ Argenson, 
scheme of, 
missal of, 381. 

Darmeés, 678. 

Daun, Marshal, 411, 417, 422, 
424. 

Davoust, 608, 633. 

Decazes, minister of Louis 
XVIII., 639, 640, 641. 

De Launay, 497. 

Delessart, 519, 523. 

Demetrius, the False, 189. 
The second False, tb. 

Denain, battle of, 260. 

Dennewitz, battle of, 623. 


Italian 
Dis- 


357. 
376. 


INDEX. 


Departments, creation of 
French, 507. 

De Retz, cardinal, 164, 166, 
167, 168. 

Désaleurs, 278. 

Descartes, 160, 191. 

Desmarets, 256. 

Desmoulins, Camille, 496, 
504,530, 546. Death of,547, 

Dettingen, battle of, 358. 

Devolution, law of, 220. 

Diebitsch, Russian general, 
656. In Poland, 668. 

Diet, the German, 15. 

Directory, the, instituted, 
552. Composition of, 553. 
Fall of, 568. 

Djem, brother of Bajazet IT., 
31. Handed over to Charles 
VIII., 35. Death, 38. 


Djezzar Pasha, 567. 

Dolgorouki, Iwan, 286. 

Donauworth, annexed to 
Bavaria, 133. 

Doria, Andrea, 51. 

Doroschenko, 204. 

Dover, treaty of, 222. 

Dragatschan, battle of, 650. 


Dresden, treaty of, 374. 
Battle of, 923. 
Dubarry, madame, 433. 


Death of, 545. 

Dubois, the abbé, 295, 298, 
300. Becomes a cardinal, 
301. Death of, 302. 


Dumouriez, 520. Becomes 
a mini-ter, 523. Resigns, 
524. Repulses the Prus- 
sians, 528. Conquers Bel- 
gium, 534. Defeated at 
Neerwinden, 539. Failure 
of his plan and flight, 539, 
540. 

Duncan, admiral, 563. 

Dunkirk, acquired by Eng- 
land, 170. Sold to France, 
219, 

Dupes, day of, 156. 

Dupleix, 397. 

Dupont de |]’Eure, 674, 684, 
714, 

Duquesne, 227. 

—,, Fort, 397. Captured by 
the English, 419. 


E. 


Eck, controversy of, with 
Luther, 55. 

Eggenberg, minister of Fer- 
dinand II., 141. 

Egmont, count, 91. Heads 
the nobles in the Nether- 
lands, 106. His embassy 
to Madrid, 107. Imprisoned 
by Alva, 108. Executed, 
109. 

Egypt, conquered by the 
Turks, 31. Bonaparte’s 
expedition to, 563. Made 


Family. 


hereditary for Mehemet 
Ali, 742. 

Electors, the seven, 14. 

Elizabeth, of England, 92. 
Supports the Huguenots, 
118. Proposals ofa French 
marriage for, 120. 

—— of Parma, wife of Philip 
V. of Spain, 296, 310, 311, 
336,340. Concludes treaty 
of Seville, 314. Joins 
League of Turin, 317, 318. 
Ambition of, 354. Loses 
power on death of her 
husband, 378. 

Elizabeth, of Russia, 388. 
Hostility to Frederick the 
Great, 390, 403, 415. Allied 
with Austria against Prus- 
sia, 407. Death of, 427. 

Elliott, general, 486. 

Elsass, ceded to Charles the 
Bold, 23. Conquered by 
Bernhard of Saxe-Weimar, 
148. Ceded to France, 149, 
150 (see Alsace). 

Emanuel Philibert, of Savoy, 
wins battle of St. Quentin, 
91. Recovers his father’s 
duchy, 92. His govern- 
ment, 183. 

Emilia, province of, 721. 

Empire, Holy Roman, de- 
cline of, 2. Loss of power 
in Italy, 7. Connexion 
with German monarchy, 
15. End of, 592. 

Enghien, duke of, murdered, 
584, 

Enzheim, battle of, 226. 

Erfurt, interview at, 606. 

Eric, of Sweden, 185. 

Ernest Augustus, of Han- 
over, 688. Grants con- 
stitution, 690. 

Escorial, the, built by Philip 
T7), 10L. 

Espartero, 679, 680. 

Espinosa, battle of, 606. 

fstatuto Real, 679. 

Etaples, treaty of, 25. 

Eugene Beauharnais, 585. 
Viceroy of Italy, 587. 
Fidelity to Napoleon, 618. 
Defeated at Mockern, 621. 
Receives principality of 
Eichstadt, 626. 

Eugene, prince, of Savoy, 
210, 214, 243, 249, 250, 252, 
253, 257, 261, 305, 306, 309, 
310, 318. Death of, 320. 

Eugénie, the empress, 714. 
Flight from France, 735. 

Evoramente, treaty of, 672. 

Eylau, battle of, 596. 


F. 


Family Compact (1733),336. 
Do. (1761), 426. 


Fayrel. 


Farel, Guillaume, 70. 

Farnese, Alexander, 104. 
Commands in the Ne- 
therlands, 111. Reduces 
southern provinces, 112. 
Intervention in France, 
125. Death, tb. 

Farnese, Ottavio, marries 
Charles V.’s daughter Mar- 
garet, 76. Obtains Parma 
and Piacenza, 91. 

Farnese, PieroLuigi,receives 
Parma and Piacenza from 
Paul III., 84. Murdered, 
1b. 

Favre, Jules, 735, 736. 

Fehrbellin, battle of, 197, 
325. 

Fénélon, 256, 264. 

Feodor, of Russia, 199. 

Ferdinand (the Catholic), of 
Aragon, 26. Marries 
Isabella of Castile, 27. 
Family policy, 28. An- 
nexes Naples,ib. Death,7ib. 

Ferdinand 1., emperor of 
Austria, 688. Attitude to- 
wards the revolutionary 
movement, 689, 696, 697. 
Abdication of, 697. 

Ferdinand of Brunswick,414. 
Victories of, 415, 418, 422, 
426. 

Ferdinand I., emperor, ac- 
quires Bohemia and Hun- 
gary, 52. Concludes treaty 
of Passau, 86. Concludes 
peace of Augsburg, 89. Be- 
comes emperor by Charles 
V.’s abdication, 91. Re- 
ligious policy, 130. 

[., emperor, 137. 
Drives Frederick V. from 
Bohemia, 137. Suppresses 
Protestantism in his terri- 
tories, 138. Issues Edict 
of Restitution, 142. Dis- 
misses Wallenstein, 143. 
Recalls Wallenstein, 144. 
Introduces the Jesuits into 
Hungary, 205. Death of, 
148, 

—— IIL, emperor, wins vic- 
tory at Nordlingen, 147. 
Succeeds his father, 149. 
Concludes treaty of West- 
phalia, 150. Supports 
Poland against Sweden, 
194. Persecutes Protes- 
tants in Hungary, 205. 

Ferdinand I., of Naples, 8. 
His cruel rule, 9, 33. 
Death, 35. 

-— IL., of Naples, 36. Re- 
covers Naples, 37. Death, 


tb. 

-— IV., of Naples, 434,565, 
566. Restored in Naples, 
632 (see Ferdinand I. of 
the ‘Two Sicilies). 


INDEX. 


Ferdinand VI., of Spain, 378, 
395. Death of, 423. 

— VIL, of Spain, 601. 
Imprisoned by Napoleon, 


602. Released, 625. Re- 
stored, 641. Revolt 
against, 642. Recovers 


authority, 647. Abolishes 
the Salic law in Spain, 679. 
Death of, 7b. 

Ferdinand, of Styria, 135. 
Acknowledged as heir to 
Matthias, 136. Elected 
emperor, 137 (see Fer- 
dinand IJ., emperor). 

Ferdinand I., of the Two 
Sicilies, 639,644. Accepts 
constitution, 645. Re- 
covers absolute power 
(see Ferdinand IV., of 
Naples). 

—— II., of the Two Sicilies 
(Bomba), 671, 691, 694. 
Cruelties in Sicily, 701, 
717. Death of, 722. 

Ferdinand III., of Tuscany, 
556, 565, 630, 643. 

Fermor, Russian general, 
415. Defeated at Zorn- 
dorf, 417. 

Ferrara, war of (1482), 4, 14. 
Annexed to papal states, 
181. 

Ferriéres, 514. 

Feuillants, the, 515, 519. 

Fieschi, 676. 


Finland, conquered by 
Russia, 279. 

Flesselles, 497. 

Fleurus, battle of, 240. 
Battle of, 551. 

Fleury, cardinal, 302. Be- 


comes chief minister, 303. 
Attitude in Polish suc- 
cession question, 316, 317. 
Secures Lorraine for 
France, 319. Attitude in 
Austrian succession, 341, 


344. Opposes Maria 
Theresa, 345. Death of, 
356. 


Flodden, battle of, 42. 

Florence, the capital of Italy, 
25. 

Florida, sold to the United 
States, 642. 

Foix, Gaston de, 41. 
at Ravenna, 42. 
Fontainebleau, treaty of, 

360. Treaty of (1785),457. 
Treaty of (1807), 600. 
Fontenoy, battle of, 369. 
Fornovo, battle of, 37. 
Foscari, Francesco, 13. 
Fouché, 568, 631, 633, 
Foulon, 496, 499. 
Fouqueé, general, 424, 
Fouquet, 216. 
Fox, Charles James, death 
of, 593. 


Killed 


759 
Prederick. 


Foy, general, 658. 

Franche-Comté, ceded to 
Louis XI., 24. Restored 
by Charles VIIL, 25. 
Conquered by French, 220. 
Restored to Spain, 221. 
Second conquest of, 225. 
Ceded to France at Nim- 
wegen, 229. 

Francesco d’Este, duke of 
Modena, 351, 355, 385. 
Francis of Anjou-Alengon, 

122, 123. 

Francis I1., of Brittany, en- 
gaged in war of Public 
Weal, 22. Death, 25. 

Francis I., emperor, 372, 392, 
406. Death of, 436. 

— II., emperor, 468, 522, 
524. Assumes title of 
emperor of Austria, 586. 
Abandons the old imperial 
title, 592 (see Francis I., 
emperor of Austria). 


Francis I., emperor of 
Austria, 592, 637. Death 
of, 688. P 


Francis I., king of France, 
43. Conquers Milan, 7b. 
Concludes Concordat with 
Leo X., ib. Candidature 
for the empire, 45. 
Rivalry with Charles V., 


46. Taken prisoner at 
Pavia, 49. Concludes 
treaty of Madrid, 7b. 
Forms league against 
Charles, 50. Concludes 
treaty of Cambray, 51. 
Renews the war, 74. 


Death, 78. 

Francis IL., of France, 116. 

Francis 1V., of Modena, 630, 
644, 670, 67). 

V., of Modena, 692, 693, 
720. 

Francis I., of 
Sicilies, 645. 
671. 

— _ IL., of the Two Sicilies, 
722, Expelled, 723. 

Francis Joseph, of Austria, 
697, 698, 708. Issues con- 
stitution of 1861, 726. 
Commands in Italy, 720. 

Francis Stephen, of Lorraine, 
313. Marries Maria 
Theresa, 319, 338. Ex-— 
changes Lorraine for Tus- 
cany, 319. Candidature 
for the empire, 343. 
Elected emperor, 372 (see 
Francis I., emperor). 

Frankfort, union of, 361. 
Annexed to Prussia, 730. 
Treaty of, 736. 

Frauenstadt, battle of, 274. 

Frederick I., of Denmark, 
67, 185. 


the Two 
Death of, 


| —— II., of Denmark, 185. 


— VI., of Denmark, 624. 


760 
Frederick. 


Frederick LI., of Denmark, | 
194,195. Establishes ab- 
solutism, 196. 

IV., of Denmark, 270, | 
271, 272, 278, 283. 


—— VIL. of Denmark, 691, 
709. Death of, 726. 

Frederick III., emperor, 15. 
Goes to Rome, 17. Inter- 


view with Charles. the, Frederick 


Bold, 23. Guardian of La- 
dislaus Postumus, 18. Ac- 
quires Austria, 19. War 
with Hungary, 20. Death, 
tb 


tb. 
Frederick III., Elector Pa- 
latine, 131. 

— IV., Elector Palatine, 
USLs 

— V., Elector Palatine, 
131. Marries Jlizabeth 
of England, 7b. Accepts 
the crown of Bohemia, 137. 
Driven from Bohemia, ib. 
Deprived of bis electorate, 
138. Joins Gustavus Adol- 
phus, 144. 

Frederick of Naples, 37. 
Expelled irom his king- 
dom, 39. 

Frederick I., of Prussia, 327. 
— II. (the Great), of 
. Prussia, quarrel with his 
father, 331, 332. 
sion of, 334, 337. Invades! 
Silesia, 342. Alliance | 
with France, 345. Con-' 
cludes convention of Klein ; 
Schnellendorf, 347. Breaks | 
the convention, 348. Mo-| 
ravian campaign, 348-350. 
Makes peace with Maria; 
Theresa, 351. Forms Union 
of Frankfort, 362. Fresh 
alliance with France, 363. 
Invades Bohemia, 363, 364. 
Repulsed by Traun, 365. 
Repels attack on Silesia, 
370. Invades Saxony, 
373. Concludes the treaty 
of Dresden, 374. Alliance 
with England, 399. In- 
vades Saxony, 404-406. 
Invades Bohemia, 411. 
Defeated at Ksolin, 7b. 
Victories at Rossbach, 413, 
Leuthen, 414, and Zorn- 
dorf, 417. Defeated at} 
H: chkirch, 417, and | 
KCunersdorf, 421. Victory | 
at lorgau, 424. Concludes 
prace of Hubertsburg, 429. 
Domestic government,4338. | 
Attitude in the Polish 
question, 410, 443. In- 
terviews with Joseph IL., 


Acces- | 


Frederick 


INDEX. 


451, 452. 
Fiirstenbund, 457, 458. 
Joins the Armed Neu- 
trality, 483. Death of, 
458. 


| Frederick, elector of Saxony, 


46. Founds university of 
Wittenberg, 54. Supports 
Luther, 57. Death, 61. 


Frederick, of Sweden, 389. 


Augustus, of 
Saxony, 595, 621, 624. 
Recovers part of Saxony, 
629. 

William, of 
Brandenburg (the Great 
Elector), 149,192,193, 222. 
Frees Prussia from Polish 
suzerainty, 194, 195, 324. 
War with Sweden, 197, 
226, 229, 325.. At war 
with Louis XIV., 223, 240, 
324. Claims in Silesia, 
325. Domestic govern- 
ment, 326. 


Frederick William I., of 


Prussia, 327. War with 
Sweden, 280, 283, 329. 
Joins league of Hanover, 
312. Concludes tzeaty of 
Wiisterhausen, 312, 330. | 
Relations with the 
emperor, 322, 330, 333,334. 
Domestic government, 
328. Claims to Jiilich and 
Berg, 330. Quarrel with 
his son, 332. 

II., of Prussia, 459, 460, 
464, 465. Concludes treaty 
of Reichenbach, 466. Atti- 
tude towards Poland, 467. 
Concludes Second Partition, 
469. Accepts Third Par- 
tition, 472. Attitude to- 
wards France, 517, 518. 


Forms the, 
| Friedrichshall, 


Concludes treaty of Basel, 
551. Death of, 584. 

IIl., of Prussia, 584, 
586. Joins league against 
France, 590. Makes peace, 
591. Renews the war, 593. 
Accepts treaty of Tilsit, 
598. Grants passage to 
French, 615. Forced into 
the war of liberation, 619. 
Joins the Holy Alliance, 
636. Refuses constitution 
to Prussia, 637. Death of, 
688. 


— IV., of Prussia, 688. 


Attitude towards revo- 
lution, 689, 701. Inter- 
vention in Holstein, 691, 
703. Refuses the offer of 
the empire, 705. Policy 
in Germany, 707, 708. 
Death of, 725. 


447, Arranges partition, | Freiburg, battle of, 149. 
448. Opposes Joseph II... Friedewalde, treaty of, 86. 
in Bavarian succession, Friedland, battle of, 597. 


George. 


Friedlingen, battle of, 251. 
Charles 
XII.’s death at, 282. 


| Friesland, Kast, ceded to 


Hanover, 629. 
Fronde, the, 164-169. 
Fructidor, coup d@’état of the 
18th, 561. 
Frundsberg, George, 50. 
Fuentes d’Unoro, battle of, 
614. 
Fiirstenberg, William of 
238. 
Fiirstenbund, the, 458. 
Fiissen, treaty of, 368. 


re 


Gadebusch, battle of, 280. 

Gagern, president of the 
German Parliament, 702, 
704, 705, 707. 

Gages, Spanish general, 356, 
359, 375, 376, 378. 

Gambetta, 735, 736. 

Garibaldi, 695. Defends 
Rome, 700. Opposes the 
cession of :Nice, 722. In 
Sicily and Naples, 722, 
723. Deteated at Aspro- 
monte, 725. Defeated by 
the French at Mentana, 
732. In France, 736. 

Garigliano, the, 36. Battle 
of, 39. 

Garnier-Pagés, 682, 684. 

Gastein, convention of, 728. 

Gaston of Orleans, brother 
of Louis XIII. (at first of 
Anjou), 154, 155. Quar- 
rels with Richelieu, 156. 
Claim to the regency, 161. 
Hostility to Mazarin, 166. 
Death of, 169. 

Gemblours, battle of, 111. 

Geneva, Reformation in, 
69. United to France, 564. 
Annexed to Switzerland, 
630. 

Genoa, ceded to Sardinia, 
628. 

George, margrave of Bran- 
denburg, becomes a Pro- 
testant, 63. 

George 1, of Hanover and 
England, 280, 283, 298. 
— IL., of England and 
Hanover, 341, 345. Se- 
cures the neutrality of 
Hanover, 346. Wins 
battle of Dettingen, 358. 
Concludes convention of 
Hanover with Prussia, 
371. Relations with 
Austria alter the war, 395. 
Allied with Prussia, 399, 
409,415. Death of, 425. 

—- IIl., of England, 573, 
583. 

George I., of Greece, 748. 


———— rl 


George. 
George, duke of Saxony, 62. 
Opposition to Protestant- 
ism, 63. Death, 81. 


burg, 143. 

Gerard, Balthasar, 
nates William the Silent, 
112. 

Gérard, marshal, 666. 

Gertruydenburg, congress at, 
258. 

Ghent, revolt of, 
Charles V., 76. 
tion of, 111. 

Gibraltar, seized by the En- 
glish, 254. Ceded at 
Utrecht, 260. Siege of, 
313, 314. Second siege of, 
483, 486. 

Girondists, the, 520, 531. 
Fall of, 541, 545. 

Gneisenau, 605, 616, 632. 

Goito, battle of, 694. 

Godoy, Spanish minister, 
538, 576, 600, 601. 

Godunof, Boris, 189. 

Gondi, Paul de, 164 (sce De 
Retz). 

Gonsalvo de Cordova, 28. 
Victories over the French 
in Naples, 39. 

Girgey, Hungarian leader, 
697, 698, 699. 

Gortschakoff, V4Sn(40, col 

(sourko, general, 750. 

Gorz, count, 280. Inservice 
of Charles XII., 281, 282. 
Executed, 283, 300. 

Granada, conquest Off ade 
Treaty of, 39. 

Grand Alliance, 
249. 

Granson, battle of, 24. 

Granvella, cardinal, 104. 
Recalled from the Nether- 
lands, 105. 

Gravelines, battle of, 91. 

Gravellotte, battle of, 735. 

Gregory XIII., pope, 99. 

= XV... 182. 

———— MVE. GT, 691: 

_ Of, 692. 

Greece, kingdom of, 657. 

Grévy, Jules, 737. 

Grodno, diet of, 470. 

Gross Beeren, battle of, 623. 

Gross Gorschen, battle of, 
621. 

Gross Hennersdorf, battle of, 
Sia 

Grouchy, marshal, 632. 

Grumbkow, 331, 332. 

Guerrazzi, 695. 

Guinegate, battle of (1482), 
24. Battle of( 1512), 42. 

Guise, Charles, duke of, 126. 

Guise, Claude of, 115. 

Guise, Francis of, 115. Com- 
mander in Metz, 87. Op- 


against 
Pacifica- 


the, 2:8, 


Death 


posed to Alva in Italy, 


o4 


assassi- | 


INDEX. 


91. Captures Calais, 7b. 
Assassinated, 118. 


| Guise, Henry, duke of, 121. 
George William of Brand -n- | 


Forms the Catholic League, 
123. Assassinated, 124. 
Guise, the duke of, in Naples, 

1 t1 T6s 

Guise, Mary of, married to 
James V. of Scotland, 77. 

| Guizot, 659, 672, 674, 676. 
Embassy to London, 677. 
Ministry of, 678, 680. 
Resignation of, 683. 

Gustavus Vasa, 67. Be- 
comes king of Sweden, 
68. Introduces the Re- 
formation, 69. 

—— Adolphus, ‘of Sweden, 
interests involved in 
Thirty Years’ War, 139. 
Sends aid to Stralsund, 
141. Lands in Germany, 
143. Obtains alliance of 
Brandenburg and Saxony, 
tb. Defeats Tilly, 144. 
Marches into southern 
Germany, tb. Reduces 
Bavaria, tb. Killed at 
Liitzen, 145, 191. Acces- 
sion, 188, Relations with 
Russia. 190. War with 
Poland, tb. 

— lII., of Sweden, 463, 
517, 523. 

Gustavus IV., of Sweden, 
587. Deposed, 599. 

Gyllenborg, 282. 


a = 


Fare treaty of the (1788), 
461. Do. (1794), 550. 

Halle, university of, 325. 

Hanover, league of, 312, 330. 
Convention of, 371. King- 
dom of, 630. Annexed to 


Prussia, 730. 
Hapsburg, house of, ac- 
quires Austria, 16. QOb- 


tains practically heredi- 
tary possession of the 
empire, 15. Acquires the 
Netnerlands,20.° Acquires 
Hungary and Bohemia, 
18, 52; 

Harcourt, count, 247. 

Hardenberg, Prussian mi- 
nister, 586. Dismissal of, 
603, Resumes office, 615. 
At thecongress of Vienna, 
628, 629. Subsequent con- 
duct, 637. 

Haro, Don Luis de, succeeds 
Olivarez, 177. Negotiates 
treaty of the Pyrenees, 
171. 

| Hassenpflug, 708. 

‘Hastenbeck, battle of, 412. 

Haugwitz,Prussian minister, 
584, 586, 590. Fall of, 595. 


rd 


i61 


Hesse-Cassel. 


Havre, ceded to England by 
the Huguenots, 118. Re- 
covered by France, 7b. 

Haynau, Austrian general, 
699, 700. 

Hébert, 538, 
of, 546. 

Heilbronn, league of, 146. 

Heiligerlee, battle of, 109. 

Heinsius, 249, 257. 

Heliopolis, battle of, 578. 

Heligoland, ceded to Eng- 
land, 624. 

Helvetic Republic, 581. 

Henrietta of Orleans, 222. 

Henriot, 540, 541, 548, 549. 

Henry of Anjou, 119, 121 
(see Henry III. of France). 
Elected king of Poland, 
122, 186. 

Henry of Brunswick, 81. 
Expelled by League of 
Schmalkalde, 82. 

Henry I1., of France, marries 
Catharine de Medici, 74. 
Allies himself with Ger- 
man princes against 
Charles V., 86. Annexes 
the three bishoprics, 87. 
Persecutes Protestantism, 


510. Death 


115. Death, 7b. 
—— Ill, of France, 122, 
124. Assassinated, 125. 


V., of France, be- 
comes head of the house of 
Bourbon, 118. Heir tothe 
throne, 123. Wins battle 
of Coutras, 124. Obtains 
the crown, 125. Defeats 
the League, ib. Becomes 
a Roman Catholic, 126. 
Issues edict of Nantes, 7b. 
His government, 127. 
Alliance with German 
Protestants, 134. Assas- 
sinated, 128, 134. 

enry VIIL., of England, 

allied with Charles V., 47. 

Joins France,50. Jealous 

of French influence in 

Scotland, 77. Captures 

Boulogne, 78. 

Henry of Navarre, 120, 123 
(see Henry LY. of France). 

Henry of Portugal, 104. 

Henry of Prussia, brother of 
Frederick the Great, 415, 
421, 427, 442, 447. 

Henry, duke of Saxony, in- 
troduces Protestantism, 
Sl; 

Herzegovina, conquered by 


| H 


the Turks, 31. Revolt ot, 
748. 
Hertzberg, Prussian min- 


ister, 46), 461. 
462, 464, 466. 
Hesse-Cassel, electorate of, 
582. Annexed to Prussia, 

730. 


Policy of, 


762 
Hildburghausen. 


Hildburghausen, prince of, 
412, 413. 

Hobart Pasha, 748. 

Hoche, Lazare, 544, 554, 559. 
Death of, 562. 

Hochkirch, battle of, 417. 

Hochstett, battle of, 575. 


Hofer, Andrew, 608. Death 
of, 611. 
Hee oe battle of, 


Hohenlinden, battle of, 576. 
_Hohenlohe, Prince, 594. 
Hohenzollern, house of, ac- 
quires Brandenburg, 16. 
Hohenzollern - Sigm ringen, | 
Leopold of, 734. 

, Charles of, 745. 

Holderness, Lord, 398. | 

Holland, independence of, 
113, 150, 174. 

Holy Alliance, the, 636. 

Holy League, 41. 

Horn, Swedish general, 
147. 

Hornby, admiral, 750. 
Hortense Beauharnais, mar-! 
ried to Louis Bonaparte, 

585, 592. 

Hotham, Sir Charles, 331, 
332. 

Hubertsburg, treaty of, 4287 

Hugo, Victor, 712. 

Hungary, acquired by the 
Hapsburgs, 18. Becomes 
independent under Mathias 
Corvinus, 19. Recovered 
by the Hapsburgs, 52. 
Revolts against Leopold I., 


146, 


205. Rebellion of, 698, | 
699. Receives separate | 
constitution, 731. 
Huniades, John, 18. Re-| 
lieves Belgrad, 19. 
Hutten, Ulrich von, 56.) 


Conduct in the Knights’ 
war, 59. 

Hyndford, Lord, 345, 347, 
350. 


q. 


Ibrahim, Turkish sultan, 
202. 

Ibrahim Pasha, son of Me- 
hemet Ali, 653, 655, 741. 
Succeeds in Egypt, 742. 

Tilyrian Provinces, the, 610. 

Imperial Chamber, _ insti- 


tuted, 29. Renewed, 46. 


Roman Catholic majority 
in, 133. 

Index, the, issued by Paul} 
IV., 96. 

Inkermann, battle of, 744. 

Innocent VIII., pope, 10, 31. 
Supports Neapolitan ba- 
rons, 33. e 

—— XI, 234, 236, 237. 
Quarrel with Louis XIV., 
238. Death of, 244, 


as 


INDEX. 


Innocent XII., 247. 

Inquisition, the, in Spain, 27. 
Introduced into Rome, 95. 
Employed for _ political 
purposes by Philip I1., 
103. 


Interim, _ the, 
Charles Y., 85. 

Ionian Islands, ceded to 
Brance, 562. Given by 
England to Greece, 748. 

Ipsilanti, 650. 

Isabella, of Castile, 27. 

Isabella II., of Spain, 679. 
Marriage of, 680. Eyx- 
pelled, 733. 

Ivry, battle of, 125. 

Iwan IIE., of Russia, 186. 

—— IV. (the Terrible), 187. 

—— VL., 341, 336. Deposed, 
388. Death of, 439. 


issued by 


J. 


Jacobin Clnb, the, 506, 516, 
520. 

Jagellon, house of, acquires 
Poland, 18. Extinction 
of, 186. 

Jagerndorf, 323, 324. 

James L, of England, his at- 
titude in the Thirty Years’ 
War, 137, 139. 

—— IL., of England, 236, 
237, 239. Death of, 249. 

James Y., of Scotland, 77. 

Janissaries, 30, 31, 200. De- 
struction of, 634. 

Jansen, Cornelius, 233. 

Jansenists, the, 233. Perse- 
cution of, 261, 262. 


| Jarnac, battle of, 120. 


Jaroslavetz, battle of, 617. 
Jassy, treaty of, 466. 
Jeanne, of Navarre, 115, 12). 
Jellachich, Ban of Croatia, 
697. 
Jemmappes, battle of, 534. 
Jemmingen, battle of, 109. 
Jena, battle of, 594. 
Jenkins’ ear, war of, 337. 
Jesuits, foundation of, 94. 
Character of their institu- 
tions, 95. Quarrel with 
the Dominicans, 181. 
Expelled from Venice, 181, 
182. Decline of 432. Ex- 
pelled from Portugal, 435, 
436; from France, 436 ; 
from Spain, 7b. Suppres- 
sed by Clement XLV., 437. 
Joachim I., of Brandenburg, 
81. 
—— IL., of Brandenburg, 81, 
325. 
Joachim Frederick of Bran- 
denburg, 132, 324. 
Joanna, daughter of Ferdi- 
nand and Isabella, married 
to the archduke Philip, 28. 


Juarez. 


Joanna Henriquez, wife of 
John II. of Aragon, 26. 
John, the archduke, 702, 704. 

John II., of Aragon, 26. 

John of Austria, Don, in 
the Netherlands, 111. 

—, Don, natural son of 
Philip IV., 170, 178, 179, 


180. 

Johu TIL, of Portugal, 104. 

——IV., of Portugal, restores 
Portuguese independence, 
Wig 

—— V., of Portugal, 435. 

—— VL, of Portugal, 600 
Takes refuge in Brazil, 6007 
642. Returns to Lisbon, 
643. Quarrel with Dom 
Miguel, 647, 648. Death, 


Af pate "elector of Saxony, 61. 
Signs Protest of Speier, 
63. Death, 64. 

John III., of Sweden, 129, 
185: 

John Casimir, of Poland, 
193, 194. Abdicates, 198. 

John Frederick, elector of 
Saxony, 64. Captured at 
Miihlberg, 84. eprived 
of his electorate, ib. Re- 
leased, 86. Fails to re- 
cover electorate, 88. 

John George, of Saxony, 
131: Obtains Lausitz, 
137. Allied with Sweden, 
144, 145. Signs treaty of 
Prague, 148. 

John Sigismund, of Bran- 
denburg, 134, 324. 

Joseph I., emperor, 253, 259, 


276. 

— IL, emperor, 438. 
Interviews with Frederick 
the Great, 447,450. Policy 
of, 449, 450. Claim to 
Bavarian succession, 451. 
Forced to accept treaty of 
Teschen, 452. Reforms of, 
453-455. Alliance with 
Catharine II., 456, 461. 
Scheme to exchange the 
Netherlands for Bavaria, 
457. Foiled by Frederick 
If., 458. Turkish war, 
463. Death of, 464. 

Joseph I., of Portugal, 435, 
436. 

Joseph, Father, Richelieu’s 
right-hand man, 143. 

Joseph Ferdinand, electoral 
prince of Bavaria, 245, 246. 

Josephine Beauharnais, 
married to Bonaparte, 555, 
585. Divorced, 612. Death 
of, 626. 

Joubert, 559, 566, 567. 

Jourdan, 544, 551, 555, 557, 
565, 625. 

Juarez, 732, 


Julich. 
iilich and Cleve, disputed 
succession to, 134, 324. 
Julius II., pope, 49. Forms 
league of Cambray and 
Holy League, 41. Death, 
42. 


III., 86. Calls second 
meeting of Council of 
Trent, 87,96. Death, 88. 

Junot, marshal, 600. 

Justice, bed of, 162. 


K. 


Kadan, peace of, 81. 

Kaghul, battle of, 446. 

Kainardji, treaty of, 449, 450, 
456. 


Kalisch, treaty of, 619. 
Kantemir, 278. - 
Kardis, treaty of, 195,198. 
Katte, lieutenant von, 332. 
Katzbach, battle of, 623. 
Kaunitz, 383. Policy of, 393, 
400, 408, 410, 438. Em- 
bassy to Versailles, 394. 
Chief minister of Austria, 
395. Interview with Fred- 
erick II., 447. Position 
under Joseph II., 454. 
Arrang:s alliance with 
Russia, 456. 
Kellermann, 527, 534. 
Kemenyi, John, prince of 
Transylvania, 203 
Kesselsdorf, battle of, 373. 
Kettler, Gothard, founds 
duchy of Courland, 187. 
Khevenhiiller, Austrian ge- 
neral, 349, 352, 357. 
Khoczim, battle of, 204. 
Kiel, treaty of, 624. 
Kiuprili, Mohammed, 202. 
, Achmet, 203, 204, 207. 
, Mustafa, 212, 213. 
Kleber, 567, 578. 
Klein Schnellendorf, con- 
vention of, 347. 
Knights, German, 16. War 
of, 59. 
Kolberg, siege of, 424. 
Kolin, battle of, 411. 
Kolokotroni, 650, 651, 652. 
Kolowrat, Austrian minister, 
695. 
Konieh, battle of, 741. 
Koniggratz, battle of, 730. 
Konigsberg, treaty of, 193. 
Konigsegg, Austrian ge- 
neral, 321. 
Kosciusko, 470, 471, 472. 
Kossuth, 695, 697, 698. 
capes to Turkey, 699. 
Kotzebue, assassination of, 
638. 
Kray, Austrian general, 574, 
Bia. 
Krudener, baroness, 636. 
Kunersdorf, battle of, 421. 
Kutaieh, treaty of, 741. 


EKs- 


INDEX. 


Kutschuk Kainardji, treaty | 


of, 449, 450, 456. 
Kutusow, Russian general, 
617, 618, 619. 


L. 


Labiau, treaty of, 194. 

La Chétardie, 387. 

Ladislaus V1I., of Poland and 
Hungary, 18. 

— VIL, of Poland, 189, 
190. 

Ladislaus 
Death, 19. 

La Favorita, battle of, 558. 

Lafayette, 481, 492. Com- 
mander of National Guard, 
498, 499, 504, 505, 506, 
514, 515. Resigns com- 
mand, 520. . In command 
of the army, 522, 523, 
524. Treachery of, 527. 
Share in the Revolution of 
1839, 659-661. Dismissed 
by Louis Philippe, 674. 

Laffite, 661, 674. 

I.a Hogue, battle of, 241. 

Lainez, general of the Jes- 
uits, 94, 95. At the Coun- 
cil of Trent, 98. 

Lally-Tollendal, 492, 502. 

Lamarck, count of, 512, 513. 

La Marmora, general, 718, 
731. 

Lamartine, 682, 684, 685. 
Candidate for the Presi- 
dency, 710. 


Postumus, 18. 


Lamberg, count, assassin- 
ated, 697. 
Lamoriciére, general, 712. 


In papal service, 722, 723. 
Landskrona, battle of, 197. 
Lanjuinais, 537, 511. 
Langensalza, battle of, 730. 
La Réveillére-Lepaux, 553. 

560. 

La Rochelle, headquarters 
of the Huguenots, 120, 
121. Besieged by Riche- 
lieu, 134, 155. 

Lascy, general, 386, 387, 
463 


Laudon, Austrian general, 
416, 421, 422, 424, 425, 463. 

Lauenburg, ceded to Den- 
mark, 629. Ceded to 
Prussia, 728. 

Lauffeld, battle of, 382. 

Lausanne, treaty of, 183. 

Lautrec, commands the 
French in Lombardy, 47. 
Takes Genoa, 50. Besieges 
Naples, 51. Death, ib. 

La Valette, 436. 

La Vendée, rising in, 539, 
541, 543. 

Law,.John, 292. 
cial schemes, 
Failure, 295. 


His finan- 
293, 294. 


763 


Letourneur. 


Laybach, congress of, 645, 
650. 


| League, the Catholic, formed 


in France, 123. Submits 
to Henry IV., 126. 

Lebrun, 570, 585. 

Leczinska, Marie, married 
to Louis XV., 302, 311, 
316. Death of, 433. 

Leczinski, Stanislaus, made 
king of Poland, 274, 275. 
Driven from Poland, 277, 
283. Elected king in 1733, 
316. Driven again from 
Poland, ib. Receives Lor- 
raine, 319. Death of, 
433. 

Ledru-Rollin, 682, 685. 
Candidate for the Presi- 
dency, 710. Exile of, 711. 

Legislative Assembly, the, 
519-529. 

Lehwald, marshal, 412, 413. 

Leipzig, battle of (1813), 
624. 


Lemburg, battle of, 205. 

Leo X., pope, 42. Concludes 
concordat with Francis I., 
43. Allies himself with 


Charles V., 47. Hxcom- 
municates Luther, 56. 
Death, 47. 

Leo XII., 643. 

Leoben, preliminaries of, 
559. 


Leopold I., emperor, elec- 
tion of, 170. First war 
with the Turks, 203, 204. 
Persecutes Hungarian 
Protestants, 206. Flies 
to Linz, 208. Annexes 
Transylvania, 213. Con- 
cludes treaty of Carlowitz, 
214, Claim to the Spanish 
succession, 245. Death of, 
253. 

—  II., empcror, 464, 465. 
Concludes treaty of Reich- 
enbach, 466. Attitude to- 
wards Poland, 467. Atti- 
tude towards France, 518, 
519, 522. Death of, 468, 
522. 

Leopold, of Lorraine, re- 
stored to his ducby at 
Ryswick, 244. 

Leopold of Saxe-Cuoburg, 
refuses the crown of 
Greece, 657. King of the 
Belgians, 666. 

Leopold IL, of Tuscany, 691, 
692. Quits Tuscany, 695. 
Retnrns to Florence, 700. 
Flight of, 720. 

Lepanto, battle of, 99, 201. 

Lerma, the duke of, minister 
in Spain, 174. Fell ef, 176. 

Le Tellier, 216, 217. 

, Pere, 261, 262, 291. 

Letourneur, 553, 560. 


764. 
Leuthen. 


Leuthen, battle of, 414. 

Lewis of Baden, general in 
the imperial service, 210, 
219.°213.:251, 262.205, 

Lewis I., of Bavaria, 690. 

Lewis, king of Hungary and 
Bohemia, killed at Mo- 
hacz, 52, 199. 

Lewis Ferdinand of Prussia, 
593, 594; 

Levenhaupt, Swedish gene- 
ral,.274, 2765 277. 


Leyden, siege of, 110. Uni- 
versity of, 7b. 
Leyden, John of, 81. 
Leyva, Antonio da, 43. 
feats the French, 51. 
L’Hdpital, Michel, 116, 117. 
Supported by Catharine 
de Medici, 119. hea 


De- 


of, 120. 

Liége, risings in, 23. 

Liegnitz, the duchy of, 325. 
Battle of, 424. 

Ligny, battle of, 632. 

Limerick, pacification of, 241. 

Lisbon, treaty of, 179, 180. 

Lisle, Rouget de, 525. 

Lithuania, united to Poland, 
185. 

Loano, battle of, 555. 

Lobau, island of, 608. 

Lobkowitz, minister 
Leopold [., 206. 

Lobkowitz, Austrian gene- 
ral, 350, 352, 360, 367, 
375. 

Lobositz, battle of, 406. 

Lodi, treaty of, 7. Battle 
of, 556. 

Lola Montez, 690. . 

Lonato, battle of, 557. 

London, treaty of (1827), 
655. Do. (18490), 678, 742. 

Longjumeau, treaty of, 119. 

Longneville, duchess of, 
sister of the Great Condé, 
165, 166. 

Lope dz Vega, 176. 

Lorges, marshal de, 240. 

Lorraine conquered by 
Charles the Bold, 23. Re- 
covered by Réné IT., 24. 
Restored to Charles III., 
171. Seized by France, 
222. Restored to Leopold 
by treaty of Ryswick, 
244. Ceded to Stanislaus 
Leczinski, 319. Reverts 
to France, 433. 

Lorraine, cardinal of, at the 
council of ‘Trent, 97. 
Minister in France, 115. 

Louis XI., of France, 22. 


of 


Relations with Charles 
the Bold, 23-4. Death, 
24. 

— XII., of France, 38. 
Conquers Milan, 39. 
Divides Naples with 


INDEX. 


Spain, ib. Alliance with 
the Borgias, 7b. Attacks 
Venice, 41. Driven from 


Italy, 42. Third marriage | 


and death, ib. 


Louis XIII., of France, 152. 


Assumes the government, 
153. Relations 
Richelieu, 156, 158. Death 
of, 161. 

— XIV., of France, de- 
clared of age, 167. Ap- 


pears at battle of Stenay, | 


170. Marries Maria 
Theresa, 171. Reiga of, 
215-266. 


— XV., of France, ac- 
cession of, 288. Comes of 
age, 302. Undertakes 
military command, 361. 


Illness at Metz, 362. 
Government of, 394. 
Colonial quarrel with 
England, 397. Allied 


with Austria, 402, 409, 
410. Debauchery of, 433. 
Death of, 434. 

— XVI., 476, 452. Sup- 
ports Turgot, 479. Sum- 
mons States General, 489. 
Relations with National 
Assembly, 493, 494, 495, 
498. Goes to Paris, 506. 
Compact with Mirabeau, 
512. Attempted flight of, 
514. Accepts the consti- 
tution, 516, 519. Rela- 
tions with Legislative 
Assembly, 521, 522. Im- 
prisoned in the Temple, 
526. Trial of, 536. Exe- 
cuted, 537, 

—— KX Vil..551. 

XVIIL., of France, 627. 
Issues Charter, 628. So- 
cond restoration of, 633. 
Reign of, 638-641. Death 
of, 657. (see Provence, 
count of). 

Louis, duke of Orleans, hos- 
t lity to Anne of Beaujeu, 
25. Claim to Milan, 36. 
Qccupies Novara, 37. 
Surrenders Novara, 38 
(see Louis X1I.). 

Louis Philippe, 539. Re- 
covers the Orleans jro- 
periy, 658. Obtains the 
crown, 661, 662. Reign 
of, 672-680. Flight to 
England, 684. ° 

Louisa, queen of Prussia, 
593. 

Louise of Savoy, claims 
duchy of Bourbon, 48. 


Regent in France, 49. 
Negotiates treaty of Cam- 
bray, 51. 


Louisiana, sold to the United 
States, 583, 


with | 


Maintenon. 


Louvel, 640. 

Louvois, 218, 222, 227, 230. 
The dragonnades of, 235. 
Induces Louis XIV. to 
attack Germany, 239. 
Death of, 241. 

Lowendahl, 381, 382, 388. 

Loyola, Ignatius, wounded 
at Pampeluna, 47. Founds 
Order of the Jesuits, 94. 
Canonised, 182. 

Liibeck, treaty of, 141, 190. 

Lucchese-Palli, count, 675. 

Lucchesini, 595. 

Luckner, 523, 527. 

Luther, Martin, birth and 
education, 54. Opposes 
sale of indulgences, 55. 
Burns the papal bull, 57. 
Before the diet of Worms, 
ib. Oproses the prophets 
of Zwickau, 58. Attitude 
towards peasants’ revolt, 
61. Marries a nun, 62. 
Death, 83. 

Lutter, battle of, 140. 

Lund, battle of, 197. Treaty 
of, ib. 

Lunéville, treaty of, 576. 

Liitzen, battle of, 145. 

Luxemburg, given to the 
king of the Netherlands, 
631. 

Luxemburg, French general, 
223, 224, 227, 240. Death 
of, 242. 

Luynes, favourite of Louis 
XIII., 153. 

Lyonne, 216, 217. Death of, 
222. 


M. 


Maanen, Van, 664. 

Maciejowice, battle of, 471. 

Mack, general, 539, 565. 
Capitulates at Ulm, 589. 

MacMahon, marshal, 720, 
735. President of the 
Trench Republic, 737. 

Mademoiselle, daughter of 
Gaston of Orleans, 168. 

Madrid, treaty of, 49. Be- 
comes the capital of Spain, 
101. 

Muestricht, siege of, 384. 

Magdeburg, besieged by 
Maurice of Saxony, 86. 
Besieged by Tilly, 143. 
Ceded to Brandenburg, 
150. 

Magenta, battle of, 720. 

Magnano, battle of, 565. 

Maine, the duke of, 263, 
265, 290, 301. 

Mahmoud II., 649. Destroys 
the Janissaries, 654. 
Quarrels with Mehemet 
Ali, 741. Death of, ib. 

Maintenon, madame de, 230. 
Married to Louis XIV., 


Majesty. 

231. Influence of, 235, 
262, 290. . Death of, 265. 
Majesty, Letter of, in Bo- 

hemia, 135, 136. 

Malagrida, Father, 436. 

Malesherb s, 477, 474, 536. 

Malmesbury, lord, 550. 

Malm, truce of, 703, 709. 

Malplaquet, battle of, 258. 

Malta, the knights of, 199, 
200. Captured by Bona- 
parte, 563. Restored to 
Knights of St. John, 578. 

Mamelukes, 31. 

Manin, Daniele, 693, 701. 

Mansfeld, Ernest count of, 
136, 137, 139. Defeated 
by Wallenstein, 140. 

Manteuffel, 701, 708, 728, 
729, 

Mantua, succession question 
in, 142, 156, 176, 183. 

Marat, 527, 530, 532, 538, 
540. Murdered, 541. 

Marengo, battle of, 575. 

Margaret, daughter of Maxi- 
milian I., betrothed to 
Charles VIII., 24. Repu- 
diated, 25. Married to 
John, Infant of Spain, 28. 
Negotiates treaty of Cam- 
bray, 51. 

Margaret, natural daughter 
of Charles V., marries 
Alessandro de Medici, 51. 
Marries Ottavio Farnese, 
76. Regent in the Ne- 
therlands for Philip IL., 
106. Superseded by Alva, 
10, 

Maria Anna of Austria, 
widow of Philip IV., re- 
gent in Spain, 179, 180. 

Maria Anna of Neuburg, 
wife of Charles Il. of 
Spain, 245. 

Maria da Gloria, 671, Queen 
of Portugal, 672. 

Maria Louisa, married to 
Napoleon I.,612. Receives 
the duchy of Parma, 630. 
I-xpelled and restored, 671. 
Death of, 692. 

Maria Theresa, daughter of 
Philip IV. of Spain, mar- 
ried to Louis XIV., 171. 

Maria ‘Theresa, of Austria, 
308. Accession of, 339. 
league against, 345. In 
Hungary,346. Cedes Silesia 
to Frederick IT., 351. Per- 
sistent hostility to France, 
352.  Poxition in 1743, 
357. Concludes treaty of 
Worms with Sardinia, 359. 
Forced to make treaty of 
Dresden, 375. Accepts 
peace of Aix-la-Chapelle, 
385. Policy during the 
peace, 393-398. Alliance 


INDEX. 


with France, 402, and with | 


Russia, 403, 407.  Con- 
cludes peace of Huberts- 
burg, 429. Subsequent 
rule, 438, 442, 448, 449, 
451. Death of, 452. 

Marie Antoinette, 476, 487, 
505, 513, 524. Death of, 
455. 

Marienburg, treaty of, 193. 

Marignano, batile of, 43. 

Maritlac, marshal, 156. Exe- 
cuted, 157. 

Marlborough, the duke of, 
24%, 251, 252. Victories 
at Blenheim and Ra- 
miillies, 253. Victories at 
Uudenarde and Malpla- 
quet, 257. Dismissal of, 
259. 

Marmont, marshal, 567. 
Commands in the Penin- 
sula, 614. Surrenders 
Paris to the allies, 626. 
Conduct in 1830, 660. 

Marsaglia, battle of, 242, 

Marseillaise, the, 525. 

Marsin, 252, 254. 

Martignac, minister of 
Charles X., 658, 659. 

Martinet, 218. 

Martinez de la Rosa, 642, 679. 

Martyr, Peter, 93, 96. 

Mary of England, 90, 91. 

Mary of Hungary, sister of 
Charles V., regent in the 
Netherlands, 75, 76. 

Mary Stuart, wife of Francis 
I1., 116. 

Mary Tudor, sister of Henry 
VIIL., married to Louis 
x 423 

Masaniello, revolt of, in 
Naples, 177. Death of, 
178. 

Massa, the prince of, 178. 

Mas-éna, marshal, 559, 564, 
565, 562,574. Commands 
in the Peniusular war, 613, 
614. 

Matthias, archduke of Aus- 
tria, in the Netherlands, 
111. Obtains from Rudolf 
II. administration of Haps- 
burg _ territories, 135. 
Elected emperor, ib. Diffi- 
culties in Bohemia. Death 
Sis 

Matthias Corvinus, king of 
Hungary, 19. Wars with 
Bohemia and Austria, 7b. 
Death, 20. 

Maupeou, minister of Louis 
XV., 433, 474. Dismissal 
Of 477% 

Maurepas, 357, 36%, 476, 477, 
479, 480, 485. : 

Maurice de Saxe, 348, 360 
(see Saxe, marshal), 


Maurice, duke of Saxony, 83. 


é 765 


Medici. 
Obtains the selectorate, 84. 
Protests against Interim, 
+5. Hostility to Charles 
V., 86. Concludes treaty 
of Passau, ib, Killed at 
Siever-hausen, 88. 


Mavrocordato, 651, 652. 
Maxen, capitulation of, 422. 
Maximilian, the archduke, 


732. 


Maximilian J., of Bavaria, 


133. Forms the Catholic 
League, 134. Supports 
Ferdinand IL, 137. | Re- 
ceives the electorate of the 
Palatine branch, 138. Op- 
poses Wallenstein, 142. 
Makes peace with France, 
150. Retains Upper Pala- 
tinate and el ctoral title, 
tb. 

II., of Bavaria, 690. 


Maximilian I., emperor, 20. 


Marries Mary of Bur- 
gundy, 138, 20, 24, Fo- 
reign policy, 21. Quarrels 
with Charles VIII. 25. 
Joins league against 
France, 36. Joins League 
of Cambray and Holy 
League, 41. Invades 
France, 42. 


Maximilian II., emperor, 


1305-131. 


Maximilian, Joseph, of Bava- 


ria, 367. Concludes treaty 
of Fiissen, 368. Death 
of, 451. 


Maximilian Joseph, king of 


Bavaria, 624. 


Mayenne, the duke of, 123. 


Head of the league, 125. 
Submits to Henry LV., 
126. 


Mazarin, cardinal, 149. 


Succeeds Richelieu, 160. 
Relations with Anne of 
Austria, 161. Conduct 
during the Fronde, 164— 
169. Concludes treaty of 
the Pyrenees, 171. Death 
of, 172. 


Mazeppa, 276, 277. 

Mazzini, 692, 695. 

Meaux, conspiracy of, 119. 
Medici, Alessandro de, mar- 


ries Charles V.’s daughter: 
Margaret, 51. Assassina- 
ted, 76. 


—-, Catharine de, marries 


Henry of Orleans, 74. 
Character of, 115. Be- 
comes regent of France, 
117. Religious attitude of, 
119, 120. Her share in 
the massacre of St. Bar- 
tholomew, 121. Death of, 
124. 


—, Cvsimo de (pater 


patriz), 10. 


766 
Medici. 


Medici, Cosimo de, the first 
erand-duke of luscany, 
76,/91. 

——., Francis de, grand duke 
of Tuscany, 127. 

—, Gaston de, grand duke 
of Tuscany, 180. 

—,. Giovanni de, 12, 42 
(see Leo X.). 

—,, Giuliano de, 11, 13. 

—., Ginlio de, 13, 47 (see 
Clement VII.). 

——.,, Lorenzino de, 76. 

, Lorenzo I. de (the 
Magnificent), 11, 12. De- 
fends Ferrara, 14. 

— , Lorenzo II. de, 43. 

——, Mary de, married to 
Henry iV. of France, 127. 
Regency »-of, , 152,%153. 
Quarrels with Richelieu, 
156. Exile of, 156, 158. 

——,, Piero I. de, 11. 

—., Piero Il. de, 12, 13, 34. 
Driven from Florence, 35. 
Death of, 39. 

Mehemet Ali, Pasha of 
Egypt, 649. Aids the 
‘Turks in Greece, 653. Ob- 
tains Syria, 677, 741. 
Forced to resign Syria, 
678, 742. Abdicates, 742. 

Melancthon, 56. Draws up 
Confession of Augsburg, 
63. At diet of Ratisbon, 
82. 

Melas, Austrian general, 
574, 575. 

Mendoza, Spanish envoy in 
France, 125. 

Menou, general, 552, 578. 

Menschikoff, favourite of 
Peter the Great, 275, 285, 
286. 

Menschikotf, 743, 744. 

Mentana, battle of, 732. 

Menzel, 404. 

Methuen treaty, 252. 

Metternich, 609, 622. At 
the congress of Vienna, 
628, 629. His opposition 
to reform, 637, 645, 651, 
66), 688. Fall of, 689. 

Metz, seized by French, 87. 
Besieged by Charles V., 
87 


Mexico, French expedition 
to, 732. 

Midhat Pasha, 750. 

Mignet, 537, 660. 

Mguel, Dom, 647, 648. 
Usurps the throne of Por- 
tugal, 672. 

Milan, under the Sforzas, 7. 
Conquered by Louis XIL., 
39, Given by Swiss to 
Maximilian Sforza, 42. 
Conquered by Francis |., 
43. Given to Francesco | 
Sforza, 47. Annexed by | 


INDEX. 


Charles V., 74. 
Philip II., 90. 

Miltitz, Carl von, 55. 

Minden, battle of, 422 

Minorca, restored to Spain, 
486. 

, ceded to England, 260. 
Conquered by French, 400. 
testored to England, 42%. 

Mirabeau, 492, 494. Charac- 
ter and aims of, 502, 503. 
Conduct in the assembly, 
504, 506, 509, 511. Re- 
lations with the court, 512. 
Death of, 513. 

Mississippi Company, the, 
293, 294, 295. 

Missolonghi, siege of, 652, 
653. 

Mockern, battle of, 621. 

Mocenigo, doge of Venice, 
202. 

Mohammed II., repulsed 
from Belgrad, 19. Cap- 
tures Constantinople, 29. 


Further conquests in 
Europe, 30. Death, 31. 
LIT S20 
Mohammed IV., 202. . De- 
posed, 211. 


Mohacz, battle of, 52, 199. 
Second battle of, 211. 

Mohileff, interview of Joseph 
II. and Catharine If. at, 
456. 

Mole, M., 674, 676, 677, 683, 
Wide 

Moleville, Bertrand de, 519. 

Molina, teaches doctrines of 
free-will, 181. 

Moillendorf, Prussian general, 
550, 551. 

Mollwitz, battle of, 343. 

Moltke, von, 730, 734. 

Moncontour, battle of, 120, 

Mons, captured by Lewis of 
Nassau, 110. 

Montalembert, 711. 

Montcalm, 425. 

Montecuculi, Austrian gene- 
ral, 203, 223, 224, 226, 227. 
Montemar, Spanish general, 

355, 356. 


Montespan, Madame de, 220. 


Montesquieu, 431. 

Mont Vhéry, battle of, 22. 

Montmorency, constable o‘, 
repulses Charles V. from 
Provence, 75. Degraded 
from office, 76.. Conquers 
the three bishoprics, $7. 
Defeated at St. Quentin, 
91. Religious attitude, 116. 
Taken prisoner at Dreux, 
118. Killed at St. Denis, 
119, 

Montpellier, treaty of, 153, 
154, 

Montpensier, duke of, son 
of Louis Philippe, 680, 733. 


Napoleon. 


Passes to! Monzon, treaty of, 139, 154. 


Mooker Heuth, battle of, 
110. 

Moore, Sir John, 607. 

Morat, battle of, 24. 

Moreau, 550, 557, 559, 562, 
566, 573, 574,575. Victory 
at Hobenlinden, 576. Re- 
lations with Bonaparte, 
580,581,584. Exiled, 585, 
Death of, 623. 

Moriscoes, expulsion of, from 
Spain, 175. 

! Morny, 712. 

| Morone, cardinal, 97. 

| Morosini, Venetian com- 
mander, 180, 204, 210. 

Mortemart, duke of, 661. 

Mounier, 493, 502. 

Mountain, the, 531. 

Miihlberg, battle of, 84. ~ 

Miinchengratz, conference at, 
669, 672. 

Munnich, marshal, 320, 341, 
387, 388. 

Miinster, the anabaptists in, 
81. 

Miinzer, Thomas, 60. 

Murat, Joachim, 567, 589. 
Receives duchy of Berg, 
592. Receives Naples, 613. 
Joins Napoleon on_ his 
reiurn from Elba, 631. 
Expelled from Naples, 
632. Death of, 633. 

| Murillo, 176. 

Mustafa Il., Turkish sultan, 
213. 

| ——JII., sulton, 446, 419. 


— lV., 649. 
| Mustapha, Kara, grand 
vizier, 207. Besieges 


: Vienna, 208, 209. 


N. 


Nakhimof, admiral, 743. 

Nancy, siege of, 24. 

Nantes, edict of, 126. Re- 
voked by Louis XIV., 236. 

Naples, claims to crown of, 

Napoleon, I. (see Bonaparte, 
Napoleon), becomes king 
of Italy, 587. Plans in- 
vasion of England, 588. 
Marches into Germany, 
589. Crushes the hostile 
coalition at Austerlitz, 
590. Forces treaty of 
Pressburg upon Austria, 
591. Provides crowns for 
his brothers, 592. Or- 
ganises confederation of 
the Rhine, ib. Deteats 
Prussians at Jena, 594. 
Issues Berlin decrees, 595. 
Defeatsthe Russians at Ky- 
lau, 596; and at Friedland. 
597. Concludes treaty of 


| 
) 
| 
| 
| 


a ee 


“iti lets nt that A a a ial 


alias ph 


a ae taal Sail 


Napoleon. 


Tilsit, 598. Attacks Portu- 
gal, 600. Attacks Spain, 
601. Interview with Alex- 
ander I. at Erfurt, 606. 
Campaign in Spain, 607. 
Defeats the Austrians at 
Aspern, 608; and Wagram, 
609. Concludes treaty of 
Vienna, 610. Confiscates 
the Papal States, 611. 
Annexes Holland = and 
coast of North Germany, 
611. Marries the arch- 
duchess Maria Louisa, 612. 
Invades Russia, 616. Re- 
treat from Moscow, 617. 
Campaigns in Germany, 
621, 623. Defeated at 
Leipzig, 624. Abdicates, 
626. . Landsin-Elba, 627. 
Returns to France, 631. 
Defeated at Waterloo, 632. 
Sent to St. Helena, 633. 
Death of, 633, 641. 

Napoleon, Louis, 624, 671. 
At Strasburg, 677. At 
Boulogne, 678. Elected to | 
the French chamber, 636. 
Returns to France, 710. 
President of the Republic, 
710, 711. Coup dWeétat, 
712. Restores the empire, 
713 (see Napoleon III). | 

—  III., 713. Character of, 
714. Embarks in the 
Crimean War, 743, 
Alliance with Sardinia, | 
718, 719. Campaign in| 
Italy, 719. Concludes| 
peace of Villafranca, 720. 
Obtains Savoy and Nice, 
721. Convention about 
the occupation of Rome, 
725. Relations with 
Austria and Prussia, 729.) 
Resumes the occupation 
of Rome, 732. Mexican 
expedition, 733. Picks a 
quarrel with Prussia, 734. 
Surrenders at Sedan, 735. 
Death of, 737. 

Narvaez, 680, 733. 

Narwa, battle of, 272. 

Nassau, annexed to Prussia, 


730. 
, Lewis of, 108. Makes! 
war on Alva, 109. Killed 


at Mooker Heath, 110. 
Navarino, battle of, 655. 
Navarre, annexed by 

Ferdinand the Catholic, 

42. 

Necker, 478, 480, 481, 484. | 
Resignation of, 485. Re- 
call of, 489, 491. Conduct, 

as minister, 491,493. Dis-| 

missal of, 496. Again re- 
called, 498. Weakness of, 

502. 504, 509. Resigns 


and Jeaves France, 513, 


INDEX. 


Neerwinden, battle of, 242. 
Battle of, 539. 

Neipperg, Austrian general, 
321, 339, 343, 347, 3418. 

Nelson, admiral, 563, 565, | 
566, 577. Killed at Trafal- | 
gar, 589. ! 

Nemours, duke of, son of 
Louis Philippe, 677, 678. 

Nesselrode, 628. 

Netherlands. the, under | 
Phitip SF 104) De) 
Austrian, 309. Kingdom | 
of the, 631. 

Neuss, siege of, 23. 

Neutrality, the Armed, 483. 
Revived, 576. 

Ney, marshal, 618, 623. 

Nice, truce ot, 75. Attacked ! 
by Turks, 77. Annexed 
by French Republic, 533. 
Ceded to Napoleon III., 
722. 

Nicolas V., pope, 9. 

Nicolas, of Russia, 653. 
Policy of, 654. Attitude 
iowards Belgium, 665, 666. 
Suppresses Polish revolt, 
668. Assists Austria 
against Hungary, 699. 
Relations to Germany, 
706, 708. Involved in the 
Crimean War, 743. Death 
of, 744. 

Niederschénfeld, convention 
OL 35%: 

Nikolsburg, treaty of, 730. 

Nile, battle of the, 563. 

Nimwegen, treaty of, 229. 

Nivernois, duke of, 402. 

Noailles, cardinal, 291. 

——, the duke of, 292, 294. 

—., marshal, 356, 358, 362, 
365. 

Nordlingen, battle of, 147. 
Second battle of, 149. 

North, lord, 482, 483, 486. 

Norway, annexed to Sweden, 
624. 

Notables, assembly of, 488. 

Novara, battle of, 699. 

Novi, battle of, 566. 

Noyon, treaty of, 44. 

Nuremberg, peace of (1532), 


1 


64, 
Nymphenburg, treaty of, 
345. 


Nystiidt, treaty of, 284. 


O. 


Ochino, Bernardino, 93, 96. 

Odillon-Barrot, 676, 682, 683. 

Odysseus, 650. 

Olasch, battle of, 213. 

Oliva, treaty of, 195. 

Olivarez, Spanish minister, | 
176. 

Olmititz, convention of, 708, 
709, 


767 
Parkani. 
Oltenitza, battle of, 743. 


;Omar Pasha, 743. 
‘Orange, Philibert, prince of, 


50. 
51. 

——., William of (the Silent), 
106. Becomes a Calvinist, 
169. Acknowledged as 
stadtholder by northern 
provinces, 110. Concludes 
Pacification of Ghent, 111. 
Concludes Union of 
Utrecht, 112. Assassi- 
nated, ib. 

—, William III. of (see 
William III.). 

Orders in Council, the, 596. 

Orleans, Philip of (Philippe 
FEgalité), 491, 494, 495. 
Conduct on the 5th of Oc- 
tober, 505, 506. Exiled, 
506. Return of, 513. 
Elected to the Convention, 
530. Votes for king’s 
death, 537. Deathof, 545. 


Besieged in Naples, 


‘Orleans, Louis, duke of (see 


Louis, duke of Orleans, 
and Louis XII.). 

Orloff, Alexis, 446. 

Ormond, duke of, 259. 

Orsini, 718. 

Osman Pasha, 750. 

Osnabrtick, negotiations at, 
EGOS 

Ostermann, 386, 387, 388. 

Ostend Company, 3(9, 310, 
314, 

Otho L, of Greece, 657. Rule 
of, 747. Expelled, 748. 

Otranto, signed by the Turks, 


12, 31. Recovered by 
Naples, 31. Ceded tu 
Venice, 37. Acquired by 


Ferdinand the Catholic, 41. 
Oudenarde, battle of, 257. 
Oudinot, general, 700, 710. 
Oxenstiern, Swedish chan- 

cellor, 146, 148, 191. 


ee 


Pache, 538. 

Padilla, Juan de, 29. 

Palacky, 696. 

Palzologus, Constantine, 29. 

Palais Royal, 496. 

Palmerston, lord, 682, 718. 

Pampeluna, siege of, 47, 

Panin, Russian minister, 
446, 456. 

Paoli, Pascal, 433. 
Papacy, decline of, 2. Loses 
the temporal power, 738. 
Pardo, convention of the, 
314, 

Paris, count of, 678, 713. 

Paris, \reaties of ; (1763), 427; 
(1814), 6273 (1815), 633; 
(1856), 745. 

Parkani, batile of, 209. 


768 


Parliament. 

Parliament of Paris, history 
of, 162. Cancels Louis 
XIIT’s will, 161. Opposi- 
tion to Mazarin, 168. 
Aboli-hed by Maupeou, 
433, 474. Restored under 
Louis XVI., 477. Quarrels 
with the government, 489. 

Parma, acquired by Julius 
IL., 42.. Seized by Francis 
I., 43. Recovered by Leo 
X., 47. Given by Paul V. 
to the Farnesi, 84. Given 
to Maria Louisa, 639. 

Partition, treaties of, 246. 

Partitions of Poland, 448, 
469, 471. 

Pascal, Blaise, 233, 234. 

Paskiewitsch, 656, 742. 
down Polish revolt, 
In Hungary, 699. 

Passarowilz, treaty of, 180, 
306. 

Patino, Don Joseph, 313. 

Patkul, 270, 273, 275. 

Paul IL., pope, 10. 

—— IIL., 74. Quarre!s with 
Charles V., 84.  Estab- 
lishes the Inquisition in 
Rome, $5. Death of, 86. 

— IV., 9). Allied with 
France against Spain, 91. 
Makes peace, ib. Issues 
the first Index, 96. His 
nepotism, 7b. 

Vos: 
Venice, 7b. 

Paul J., of Russia, 564, 573, 
575. Revives the Armed 
Neutrality, 577. A-sassi- 
nated, ib. 

Paulette, the, 127, 162, 163. 

Pavia, battle of, 49. 

Pazzi, conspiracy of the, 11. 

leasants’ revolt in Germany, 
60. 

Pedro I., emperor of Brazil, 
643, 671. Death of, 672. 

—— IJ., of Brazil, 672. 

Pepé, general, 644, 645, 694. 

Perez, Antonio, 103. 

Périer, Casimir, 660, 661, 
674. 

Perronne, treaty of, 23. 

Pescara, general of Charles 
V.,48. Victory at Pavia, 
49, 

Peter the Great, of Russia, 
199. Conquers Azof, 214, 
269. His character and 
domestic government, 268, 
269, 284, 285. His war 
with Sweden, 272, 277, 284. 
Campaign of the Pruth, 
279. Death of, 286. 

— II.; 285; 286. 

— IlIl., 427. (Of Holstein, 
407, 413, 415.) 

Peterborough, earl of, 254. 

Peterwardein, battle of, 305. 


Puts 
668. 


Quarrels with 


H 


INDEX. 


Pétion, 502, 515. Mayor of 
Paris, 520, 524, 525. Death 
of, 545. 

Philip, the archduke, marries 
Joanna of Castile, 28. 
Death, 7b, 

Philip, landgrave of Hesse, 
62. Signs Protest of 
Speier, 63. Imprisoned 
ly Charles V., 84. Re- 
leased, 86. 

Philip, of Orleans, 263, 264. 
Commands in Italy, 254. 
Character, 289. Regent 
in France, 290-302. Death 
of, 302. 

Philip IL., of Spain, married 
to Mary Tudor, 90. Ob- 
tains the crown by his 
father’s abdication, 7b. 
Marries Elizabeth of 
France, 92. His policy 


and character, 102. Sup- 
presses the liberties of 
Aragon, 103. Relations 


with his son, Don Carlos, 
104. Annexes Portugal, 
105. Oppresses the Nethier- 
land-, 106. Sends Alva 
thither, 108. Jealous of 
Don John of Austria, 111. 
Intervention in France, 
123, 126. Death, 113. 

Philip IIL, 174. Expels the 
Moriscoes, 175. Death of, 
176. 

— IV., 
179, 220. 

—— V., of Spain, 247, 254, 
255,{259. Renounces claim 
upon France, 260, 289. 
Married to Elizabeth of 
Parma, 296. Under the 
influence of Alberoni, 297. 
Abdicates, 310. Resumes 
the crown, 311. Death of, 
378. 

Philip, Don, son of Philip V. 
of Spain, 318, 360, 366, 375, 
379. Receives Parma, 385. 
Death of, 437. 

Piacenza, battle of, 378. 
Pichegru, 544, 551, 555, 560, 
561,584. Death of, 584. 

Pilnitz, conference of, 518. 

Piper, count, 271, 276. 

Pirna, capitulation of, 406. 

Pisa, freed by Charles VIII., 
37. Siege of, 37, 43. Coun- 
cil of, 41. 

Pitt, William (Lord Chat- 
ham), 408, 413, 425. Re- 
signation of, 426. Last 
speech of, 482. 

——, William, 538, 577, 585. 
Death of, 590. 


176. Death of, 


Pius JI, pope, 9. Dies at 
Ancona, 10. 

—— 1IL./40: 

— IV., 97. Summons 


Prague. 


third session of Council of 
Trent, th. 

Pius V., 99, 201. 

— VI, 564. 

—— VIL. 585. Imprisoncd 
by Napoleon, 611, 620. Set 
at liberty, 625. Recovers 
the Papal States, 630. 
Death of, 643. 

IX., pope, 692, 693. 
Leaves Rome, 695. Re- 
turns, 716. Excommuni- 
cates Victor Emmanuel, 
721. Fails to recover Ro- 
magna, 723. Holds ccu- 
menical council,738. Loses 
the temporal sovereignty, 
738. 

Plassy, battle of, 418. 

Plevna, siege of, 750. 

Plombiéres, interview at,719. 

Podewils, 342, 351. 

Podiebrad, George, 17. King 
of Bohemia, 19. 

Poischwitz, armistice of, 621. 

Poissy, conference of, 117. 

Poitiers, edict of, 122, 

Poland, constitution of, 440. 
First partition of, 448. 
Reformed constitution of, 
467. Second partition of, 
469, Revolt of, 470. Third 
partition of, 471. Rising 
of (1830), 667, 668. Rising 
in (1863), 746. 


| Polignac, Jules de, 659. 


Polish succession, war of, 316- 
319, 333. 

Pombal, marquis de, 435. 
expels Jesnits from Por- 
tugal, 436. Fall of, 437. 

Pompadour, Madame de, 394, 
401, 409, 429, 436. 

Poniatowski, Stanislaus, 442. 
Klected king of Poland, 
443, Partition of great 
part of his kingdom, 448. 
Reforms the constitution, 
467. Yields to Russian 
dictation, 468. Accepts 
the second partition, 470. 
Compelled to abdicate, 
472, 

Pontchartrain, 241, 

Porcaro, Stefano, 9. 

Porto-Carrero, cardinal, 247. 

Port Royal, 233, Suppres- 
sion of, 262. 

Portugal, annexed to Spain, 
175. Revolt of, 177. 

Potemkin, favourite of 
Catharine II., 456, 461, 
462. Death, 466. 

Pozzo di Borgo, 659. 

Pragmatic army, the, 358. 

Pragmatic Sanction, the, 307, 
308, 315. 

Prague, treaty of (1535), 148. 
Taken by French, 348. 
Restored to Austria, 353. 


_ 


Pressburg. 


Battle of, 411. Treaty of | 
(1866), 730. 
Pressburg, treaty of, 590. 

Prim, general, 733, 734. 

Pritchard, arrest of, 678. 

Protestants, origin of name, 
63. 

Provence, count of,512, 514, 
522, 627 (see Louis 
XVIIZI ). 

Prussia, duchy of, formed, | 
63, 323. Freed from Po-. 
lish suzerainty, 195, 324. | 

Pruth, treaty of the, 279, ! 
305. 


Public Safety, Committee of, | 
540. Undertakes the go- 
vernment of France, 542, 
543. 

Public Weal, league of, 22. 

Pultawa, battle of, 277. 

Puysieux, marquis de, 381, | 
394. 

Pyrenees, treaty of the, 171, | 


179. 
Quadrilateral, the, 693. 
Quadruple Alliance (1717), | 


300. Do. (1834), 672. 
Quasdanowich, Austrian 
general, 557. 


Quebec, foundation of, 128. 
Taken by the English, | 
423. 

Quesnai, 432, 478. | 

Quiroga, 642. 


IEUs 


Radetzky, marshal, 691, 693° 
Victory at Custozza, 694: | 
Victory at Novara, 699. 

Radom, confederation of,) 
444. Instrument of, 7b. 

Radziejowski, cardinal, 273, 
274, 

Radziwill, 442, 444. 

Raglan, lord, 744. 

Ragoesky, Francis, 206, 207. 

—.,, George, of ‘I’ ransylva-' 
nia, 194, 203. 

Ramillies, battle of, 253. 

taspail, 685, Candidate for 
the Presidency, 710. 

Rastadt, treaty of, 261. Con- 
gress of, 563, 564, 565. 

Ratisbon, diet of, 82. 

Rattazzi, 721, 732. 

Raucoux, battle of, 38%. 

Ravaillac,assassinates Henry 
TEV3 2283 

Ravenna, battle of, 42. 

Rawka, battle of, 471. 

techberg, Austrian minis- 
ter, 727. Dismissed, 728. 

Redschid Pasha, 656, 742. 

Reichenbach, treaties of 
(1790), 466, 5183 (1813) 


622. 
34* 


| Rhodes, 


INDEX. 


Reichstadt, duke of, 675. 


| Reid, treaty of, 623. 


Renaissance, the, 8 
'Réné I, (le’ Bon), of Anjou 
and Provence, 8. 


‘—— I]. ,of Lorraine, recovers 


his duchy from Charles the 
Bold, 25. Claim to Naples, | 
33. 

Repnin, 444. 

Requesens, Don Luis de, 110. 

Reservation, the Ecclesias- 
tical, 89, 130. 

Restitution, edict of, 142. 

{ Rethel, battle of, 166. 

Reunion, chambers of, 231: 

Rewbell, 553, 560. 

Rhenschild, Swedish general, 
274, 277. 

Rhine, league of the, 171, 
Confederation of the, 592 
623. 

captured by the 
Turks, 199 

| Rhodes, knights of, 30, 31, 
199. 

Riario, Girolamo, 10. His 
share in the Pazzi conspi- 


racy, ll. 

Richelieu, cardinal, enters) 
the ministry, 154. Inter-| 
vention in Italy, 138. 


Besieges La Rochelle, 139, 
155. Conduct in Mantuan | 
succession, 142, 156, 176. 
Opposition to, 154, 155, 
156, 157. Relations witb 
Sweden, 142, 146, 148. 
Administration of, 155. 
Triumphs over his ene- 
mies, 158. Death of, 149, 
159. Domestic policy of, 
1b. Foreign policy of, 160. 

— ., duke of, 356, 399, 412. | 

duke of, minister of 
Louis XVILL., 639, 642, | 
641. 

Riego, 642. 

Rights of man, in France, 
503. In Germany, 703. | 

Hipperdas. 311, 312. Fall of, | 


Rivoli, battle of, 553. 

Robespierre, 502; 5115; 526; 
530. Conduct in the Con- 
vention, 532, 535. Enters. 
the Committee of Public. 
Safety, 542. Suppresses : 
the Hébertists and Dan-| 
tonists, 546, 547. Opposi- 
tion to, 548. Death of, 549. 

Robinson, Sir ‘Thomas, 345, 
346. 

Rocroy, battle of. 149. 

Rodney, admiral, 486. 

Roeskilde, treaty of, 195. 

Rohan, cardinal de, 487, 

Rolaud, Madame, 520, 539. 
Death of, 545. 

—, M, 520. Ministry of, 


769 
Savoy. 


523. Dismissed, 524. NRe- 
stored,526. Resigns office, 
538. Death of, 545. 

Romagna, conquered by 
Cesar Borgia, 40. 

Romanof, Michael, elected 
Czar, 190. 

Romanzow, 446, 457. 

Rome, sack of, 50. Becomes 
the capital of Italy, 738. 

Romorantin, edict of, 116. 

Rossbach, battle of, 413. 

20ssi, count, 695. 

Rostopchin, count, 617. 

Rouher, 712. 

Roumania, 745, 750, 751. 

Roumelia, Eastern, 751. 

Rousseau, 432. 

Roussillon, ceded to Louis 
XI., 24. Restored by 
Charles VIII., 25. binally 
annexed to France, 171. 

Rovere, Francesco della, 
duke of Urbino, 42. 

Rovere, Giuliano della, 10 
(see Julius II.). 


. Royer-Collard, 659. 


Riidiger, Russian general, 


666, 699. 

Rudolf 1, emperor, 132. 
Family relations, 135. 
Death, ib. 

| Rueil, treaty of, 165. 

Ruric, house of, obtains 


supremacy in Kussia, 186. 
Extinction of male line 
of, 189. 
Russell, Lord John, 727. 
Ruvigny, 255. 
Ruyter, 227. 
Ryswick, treaty of, 
214, 243. 


184, 


s. 


| Saalfeld, battle of, 594. 

Saarbrtick, battle of, 227. 
Battle of, 735. 

Sackville, Lord George, 422. 

Sadolet, cardinal, 71, 93. 

Sadowa, battle of, 730. 


| Salamanca, battle of, 614 


| Sales, St. Francis de, 98. 

Salisbury, lord, 750, 751. 

Saluces, marquis of, 75. 

Salviati, Francesco, 
bishop of Pisa, 11. 

San Juste, Charles Vs re- 
tirement at, 90. 

San Severino, Robert of, 14. 

, Galeazzo da, 34. 

San Stefano, treaty of, 750. 


arch 


| Santerre, 526, 540. 


Saratoga, capitulation of, 481, 

Sarner Bund, the, 670. 

Sarpi, Fra Paolo, 181. 

Savonarola, 43. 

Savoy, occupied by the 
French, 74. Retained in 
spite of treaty of Crespy, 


770 
Saxe. 


78. Restored to Emanuel | 
Philibert, 92. Under 
Charles Emanuel I., 183. 
Becomes more and more 
Italian, 183, 184, <An-| 
nexed by French Republic, | 
533. Ceded to Napoleon | 
Til., 722. 
Saxe, marshal, 361, 366.) 
Victory at Fontenoy, 369. | 


Further successes, 379, 
380, 382, 384. 

Scanderbeg, resists the 
Turks in Albania, 30.) 


Death, 31. 

Scharnhorst, 604, 616, 619. 

Scheldt, the, closed by treaty | 
of Westphalia, 309. Open- 
ed by the French, 534. 

Scherer, general, 555, 565. 

Schill, colonel, 608. 

Schleswig-Holstein, question | 
of, 690, 691, 703, 709. 

Revived, 726, 727. An- 
nexed to Prussia, 730. } 

Schmalkalde, league of, 63. 
Refuses aid to France, 77. 
Attacked by Charles V. 
83. 

Schénbrunn, treaty of, 590 

Schouwaloff, count, 751. 

Schulenburg, count, 305. 

Schuwalow, treaty, 423. 

Schwarzenberg, Felix, 697, 
703. 

» prince, 622, 25. 

Schwerin, marshal, 342, 343, 
364. Death of, 411. 

Sebastian, of Portugal, 104. 

Sebastopol, siege of, 744. 

Seckendorf, Austrian gene- 
ral, 321, 330, 339. In the 
service of Bavaria, 361, 
365, 366, 367. 

Sedan, battle of, 735. 

Séguier, 216. 

Seignelay, 239, 241. 

Selim 1., 31. Conquers 
Egypt, ib. 

IIL. (the Sot), 201. | 

— III., 463, 649. } 

Seminara, battle of, 39. 

Senef, battle of, 225. 

Senlis, treaty of, 25. 

September, massacres of, 
528 

Serrano, marshal, 733, 734. 

Servetus, execution of, 72. 

Seven Years’ War, religious 
aspect of, 410. 

Seville, treaty of, 314. 

Seymour, Sir Hamilton, 743. 

Sforza, Ascanio, 10. 

, Francesco, duke of 
Milan, 7. 

-——., Francesco II., duke of 
Milan, 47. Hostility to 
Charies V., 49. Joins 
league against the ¢m- 


INDEX. 


Sforza, Galeazzo Maria, 7. 
, Gian | Galeazzo, 7. 


34. Death, tb. 

, Lodovico, becomes 
regent of Milan,8. Allied 
with France, 34. Sup- 
plants his nephew, 7b. 
Joins league against 
Charles VIII., 36. Ex- 
pelled from Milan, and 
death, 59. 

——, Maximilian, duke of 
Milan, 42. Abdicates, 43. 

Shouisky, Vassily, 189. 


| Sickingen, Franz von, 59. 


Siebener - Concordat, the, 
670. 

Siena, annexed to Florence, 
76, 91. 


|Sieyés, the abbé, 492, 502, 


506, 553. Becomes a Di- 
rector, 567. 
of, 569. Refuses office of 
consul, 570. 

Sigismund IIl., of Poland, 
129, 139. 
Sweden, 185. Restores 
Roman Catholicism in 
Poland, 186, 188. War 
with Sweden, 190. 

Sigismund of Tyrol, 23. 

Sigitmund Augustus, of [o- 
land, 185, 186. 


325,342. Ceded to Prussia, 
351, 374. 

Silk manufacture, introduced 
into France, 128. 

Simon, Jules, 736. 

Simonetta, Francesco, 7, 8. 

Simson, president of the 
German Parliament, 704. 

Sinzheim, battle of, 225. 

Sistowa, treaty of, 466, 518. 

Sixtus 1V., 10. Share in the 
Pazzi conspiracy, 11. At 
war with Florence, 12. 
Attack on Ferrara, 14. 
Institutes inquisition in 
Spain, 27. Death, 14. 

— V., 99. Financial ad- 
ministration, 7b.  Chi- 
merical schemes of, 100. 

Smith, Sir Sydney, 567, 578. 

Sobieski, James, 273. 

——, John, king of Poland, 
198, 204, 205, 207. Re- 
lieves Vienna, 209. 

Soderini, Piero, gonfalonier 

of Florence for life, 43. 

Soissons, congress of, 314. 

Sokolli, grand vizier, 201. 

Solferino, battle of, 720. 

Solyman I.(the Magnificent), 
32, 199. Allied with 
France, 74, 75, 77. - Death 
of, 200. 

— II, 211. 


peror, 50. Dcath, 74. 


; Soor, battle of, 372. 


Marries isabella of Naples, | 


Constitution | 


Loses crown of ! 


Silesia, Prussian claims to, | 


Storch. 


| Sonderbund, war of the, 687. 

Sophia, sister of Peter the 
Great, 268, 269. 

‘Soubise, 412, 413, 418, 426. 

Soult, marshal, 607, 609, 

| 613, 614, 625, 626. Minis- 

| ter of Louis Philippe, 674, 

| 675, 678. 

Southwold Bay, battle of, 
222. 

Spain, decline of, 174. 

Spanish Fury, in Antwerp, 
Li}. 

Spanish marriages, the, 680. 

Spanish Succession, war of, 

| 244-261. 

Speier, diet of (1526), 62. 


| Do. (1529), 63. Protest 


iofb. 
Spinola, Spanish general, 
13%, eG. 


St. André, marshal, 117. 
Killed at Dreux, 118. 

St. Arnaud, general, 712, 
744. 

St. Bartholomew, massacre 
Ol t2ts 

St. Cyran, the abbot of, 233. 

St. Germain, treaty of, 120. 

St. Germain-en-Laye, treaty 
of, 197. 

St. Gothard, battle of, 203, 
219. 

| St. Helena, Napoleon I, at, 

633, 641. 

St. Just, 535, 542, 544, 546- 

549. 

St. Petersburg, foundation 
of, 276, 27%. Treaty of 
(1755), 398, 403. Conven- 
tion of (1757), 407. 

St. Quentin, battle of, 91. 

St. Simon, the duke of, 291. 

Stadion, count, 606, 607, 609 

| Stadel, Madame de, 572. 

| Staffarda, battle of, 240. 

Stahremberg, count, Aus- 
, trian ambassador _ to 
' France, 400. 

——,, Guido, 258, 259. 
| ——, Gundaker, 208. 

Stair, Lord, 358. 

Stangebro, battle of, 188. 

| States-General, at Tours, 

| 25. At Orleans, 117. At 

| _ Blois, 122, 124. At Paris, 

153. At Paris (1789), 489, 

491. Assume name of 

| National Assembly, 492. 

Stein, Baron vom, 458, 595. 
Reforms of, 604, 605. Dis- 
missal, 606. Conduct 
during the war of libera- 
tion, 619, 623. 

Steinkirk, battle of, 242. 

Stenay, battle of, 170. 

Stettin, treaty of, 185. 

| Stockach, battle of, 565. 

| Stockholm, massacre of, 67. 

‘Storch, Claus, 58, 


EN ARNE ANE 


‘7 


a 
ae —- 


Stralsund. 


Stralsund, siege of, 141. 

Strasburg, ceded to France, | 
244. Restored to Germany, | 
736. 

Strauss, Dr., 687. 

Styrum, count, 252. 

Suffren, the Bailli de, 484. 

Suleiman Pasha, 750. 

Sully, duke of, 127. 

‘Suwarow, 462, 471, 565-568. 

Suzzara, battle of, 250. 

Swabian League, 18. 

Switzerland, rise of league, 
3. Reformation in, 64. 
Separated from the ae 
pire, 150.. Turned into 
Helvetic Republic, 581. | 
Acquisitions at the peace, 
630,669. Disturbances in, 
670. Religious quarrels 
in, 687. Receives a new 
constitution (1848), tb. 

Szalankemen, battle of, 213. 


ibe 


Talavera, battle of, 610. 

‘Tallard, marshal, 252, 253. 

Talleyrand, 591, 592, 627. 
At the congress of Vienna, 
629. Minister of Louis 
XVIIL., 633. Dismissed, 
639. Advice to Louis 
Philippe, 661. Kmbassy 
to London, 665. 

Tanucci, 434. 

Targowicz, confederation of, 
468. 

Tauroggen, 
619. 

Temesvar, ceded to Austria, 
306. 

Ten, council of, in Venice, 
Le 

Tencin, cardinal, 356. 

‘Terrai, abhbé, 433, 477. 

Terror, reign of, 545. 

‘Teschen, treaty of, 452, 483. 

Tetzel, sells indulgences, 55. 

Teutonic knights, 18. 

‘Theatines, order ot, 94. 

Thermidorian reaction 550. 

Théot, Catharine, 548. 

Thiers, 660, 675. 
ministry of, 676. 
ministry of, 677, 678. 
Conduct in 1848, 6-3. 
Under Nap«leon, 711, 712. 
Conduct in 1870, 735, 726. 
President of the French 
Republic, 737. 

Thionville, Merlin de, 520. 

Thugut, Austrian minister, 
469, 471, 551, 554, 564, 
565. Fall of, 576. 

‘Thurn, count, 136. 

Ticino, the, boundary be- 
tween Lombardy & Pied- 
mont, 628. 


convention of, 


First | 
Second 


Tilly, victory at the White 


771 


INDEX. 

Victor. 
Hill, 137. Defeats the} land, 256.. Of England 
Danes at Lutter, 140.} and Ireland, 277. 
Obtains Wallenstein’s! Unkiar Skelessi, treaty of, 
army, 143. Sacks Magde-|_ 741. 
burg, ib. Defeated at;Urban VIII., pope, 182. 
Breitenfeld, 144. Allied with France, tb. 


Tilsit, treaty of, 597, 598. 

Tirlemont, battle of, 666. 

Ték6li, Emerich, 207, 208, 
210-213. Death of, 214. 

Tolentino, treaty of, 558. 
Battle of, 632. 

Tolly, Barclay de, 617, 621. 

Toplitz, treaty of, 623. 

Torcy, 257, 260. 

Torgau, battle of, 424. 

Torres Vedras, lines of, 613. 

Torstenson, Swedish general, 
146, 148, 149. Attacks 
Denmark, 191. 

Toulouse, battle of, 626. 

——, count of, 26.°, 265, 296. 

Tourville, admiral, 240, 241. 

Trafalgar, battle of, 589. 

Traun, marshal, 355, 359, 
360, 365, 370, 371. 

Travendahl, treaty of, 272 

Trebbia, pattle of the, 566. 

Trent, council of, #4, &7. 
Three sessions of, 96-98. 

Triple Alliance (1668), 220. 
Do. (1717), 293. 

Trivulcio, French governor 
in Milan, 39. 

Trochu, general, 735. 

Troppau, congress of, 645. 

Truchsess, Gebhard, 133. 

Tschernaya, battle cf the, 
718, 744. 

Tudela, battle of, 606. 

Tugendbund, the, 605. 

Tunis, Charles V.’s inter- 
vention in, 73. 

Turenne, 149, 150. Con- 
duct during the Fronde, 
165-169. Opposed 
Condé, 170. Campaigns 
of, 220, 222, 224-226. 

Turgot, 477. Reforms of, 
478,479. Fall of, 480. 

Turin, battle of, 254. League 
of, 317. 

Tycho Brahe, 185. 

Tyrol, rising in, 607, 609. 
Suppressed, 611. 


U~, 


Uln, capitulation of, 589. 

Ulrica Eleanor, sister of 
Charles XII., 280. Obtains 
Swedish crown, 282. Death 
of, 389. 

Ulrich of Wurtemberg, ex- 
pelled, 80. Restored by 
League of Schmaltkalde, 
81. 

Unigenitus, 
301, 303. 

Union of England and Scot- 


the bull, 262, 


Annexes Urbino, ib. 

Urbirio, conquered by Cesar 
Borgia, 40.. Acquired by 
della Rovere family, 42. 
Annexed to papal states. 
182. 


| Utrecht, union of, 112, 


to | 


Treaty of, 260, 336. 
Uzeda, the duke of, 176. 


ve 


Vaila, battle of, 41. 

Valcourt, battle of, 240. 

Valdez, Juan, 93. 

Valliére, Louise de la, 230. 

Valmy, cannonade of, 528. 

Valtelline, the, 138, 139, 154, 
176. 

Vassy, massacre of, 118. 

Vasvar, truce of, 204, 206. 

| Vauban, 224, 227, 256. 

Vaucelles, truce of, 90, 91. 

Velasquez, 176. 

Vendome, the duke of, 243, 
250," 2525 250, 20 teed 
Spain, 259. 

Venice, cedei to Austria, 
562. Restored by treaty 
of Pressburg, 591. Given 
back to Austria, 628, 
630. Recovers its iude- 
pendence, 693. Taken by 
the Austrians, 700. Ceded 
to Italy, 731. 

Vercelli, treaty of, 38. 

Vergennes, 477, 483, 485. 
Death of, 488. 

| Vergier, Jean du, 233. 

Vergniaud, 520, 526, 531, 
537,541. Death of, 545. 

Verona, congress of, 646, 
651. 

Vers, Etienne de, 34. 

Versailles, palace of, 230. 


Treaty of, 402. Second 
treaty of, 409. Treaty of 
(1783), 486. 

Vervins, treaty of, 126, 
181. 

Victor Amadeus I., of 
Savoy, 183, 184. 

;——II., of Savoy, 184. 
Relations with France, 
184, 248, 249. Joins 
league against Louis 
XIV., 184, 240. Obtains 


Pinerolo and Casale, 184, 
243. Obtains Sicily, 184, 
261. Exchanges Sicily for 
Sardinia, 184, 301. 
Ill, of Sardinia 516, 
533, 555. 

Ty Of 


Victor Kmmanue! 


T72 
Victor. 


S:rdinia, 630, 644. 
dicates, 646. 

Victor Emmanuel I1., of Sar- 
dinia, 700. Maintains the 
constitution, 717. War 
with Austria,719. Accepts 
treaty of Villafranca, 721. 
Assumes title of King of 
Italy, 724. Transfers 
court to Florence, 725. 
Alliance with Prussia, 
72%, 731. Obtains Ve- 
netia, 731. Enters Rome, 
738. Death of, ib. 

Vienna, siege of (1529), 199. 
Second siege of, 208-9. 
Treaty of (1725), 311. 
Second treaty of Stee 
315. Third treaty of (1735), 
319. Treaty of (1809), 610. 
Congress of, 628-631. 

Villafranca, treaty of, 720. 

Villars, marshal 251], 252, 
257, 258, 260, 261. Death 
of, 318. 

Villa Viciosa, battle of, 179, 
220. Second battle of, 259. 

Villéle, French minister, 641. 
Dismissal of, 638. 

Villeneuve, admiral, 588. 

Villeroy, marshal, 243, 250, 
253, 290. 

Vimeira, battle of, 603. 

Vittoria, battle of, 625. 

Voltaire, 431, 434. 


WwW. 


Wade, general, 361, 365. 

Wagram, battle of, 609. 

Walcheren, expeditions to, 
610. 

Waldstein, Albert von, 139 
(see Wallenstein). 

Walewski, 718. 

Wallachia, conquered by the 
Turks, 30. United to 
Moldavia, 745. 

Wallenstein, 139. Defeats 
Mansfield, 140. Defeats 
the Danes, 140,141. Dis- 
missed from his command, 
143. Conduct during his 
retirement, 144. Resumes 
his command, 145. Defeat- 
ed at Liitzen, 7b. His 
schemes, 146. Assassina- 
tion of, 147. 

Wallis, Austrian general, 
S21, 9s 

Walpole, Sir Robert, 336, 337, 
345. 

Wandewash, battle of, 419. 


Ab- 


INDEX. 


Wartburg, Luther 
prisoned in, 57. 
of German students at, 
638. 

Washington, George, 397. 

Waterloo, battle of, 632. 

i Wattignies, battle of, 544. 

Wehlau, treaty of, 194. 

Weissemburg, battle of, 735. 


im - 


Arthur Wellesley), 603, 
609, 610, 613, 614, 625. At 
Wattrloo, 632. Embassy 
to Russia, 654. Premier 
in England, 659, 663, 672. 

Werela, treaty of, 463. 

Westeriis, diet of, 69. 

Westminster, convention of, 
399, 402, 403. 

Westphalia, treaty of, 
161, 191. 

Westphalia, kingdom of, 595. 
Given to Jerome Bona- 
parte, 598. Broken up, 
624. 

Wettin, house of, acquires 
Saxony, 16. 

Whitworth, lord, 583. 


150, 


archbishop of Cologne, 82. 

William of Orange (William 
III.), 223, 225, 227. Marries 
Mary of England, 228. 
Forms League ofAugsburg 
against Louis XIV., 237. 
Obtains Englishcrown,239, 
Concludes the partition 
treaties, 246. Forms the 
Grand Alliance, 247. Death 
of, 248. 

William IV., 
688. 

William IV., of Holland, 382. 
Death viet 399. 


cf England, 


483, 

William I., of the Nether- | 
lands, 624, 663. 
during the Belgian revolt, 
664, 665, 666. Acknow- 
ledges the independence of 
Belgium, 667. 


Involved in French war, 
734. Becomes 
Emperor, 737. 
Wimpfen, 543. 
Windischgriitz, 
698. 
Wisnowiecky, Michael, king 
of Poland, 198, 204. 


696, 697, 


Warsaw, grand duchy of,598,} Witt, John de, 
" 610. Ceded to Russia, 629. | 


lw 


| Wellington, the duke of (Sir | 


Wied, Hermann von der, 


Zwingii. 
219, 221, 
Murdered, 223. 


| Wittelsbach, House, in the 
Meeting | 


Palatinate and Bavaria, 16. 
Wittenberg, university of,54. 
‘ Wittgenstein, Russian ge- 
neral, 620, 621, 656. 
Vittstock, battle of, 148. 
Woblau, battle of, 274. 
Wolfe, general, 419, 423. 
Wolfgang William, of Neu- 

burg, 134. 

Wolsey, cardinal. 47. Alien- 
ated from Charles V., 49. 
Worms, diet of (1495), 20; 

oe 57. Treaty of (1743), 


Wart, attle of, 735. 
Wrangel, Swedish gener.l, 
149, 


Wiirmser, Austrian general, 
544, 555, 557. 

Wurtemberg, becomes a 
duchy, 16; an electorate, 
582; a kingdom, 591. 

Wiisterhausen, treaty 
312, 330. 


of, 


PS 


Xanten, truce of, 134, 

Xavier, Francis, 94, Canon- 
ised, 182. 

Ximenes, cardinal, 28. Re- 
gent for Charles I., 29. 


ag. 


| York, the duke of, 544, 550, 


551, 566. 
York, general, 619. 


Conduct | 


German Zusmarshausen, 


Yorktown, capitulation of, 
486. 


zZ. 


Zapolya, John, claims crown 
of Hungary, 52, 199. 

"| Zaporogucs, the, 204. 

Zenta, battle of, 214. 

Znaim, armistice of, 609. 


|Zollverein, the, 669, 726. 


| Zorndorf, battle of, 417, 
| Zumalacarregui, 679. 


| Zurawna, treaty of, 205 
William I. of Prussia, 725. | Zurich, battle of, 563. 


Con- 

ference at, 720, 721. 

battle of, 
150. 

Zweibriicken, Charles of, 451, 
458. 

Zwingli, Ulrich, birth and 
education of, 64. Reform- 
ing activity, 65. Death, 7b. 


VALUABLE AND INTERESTING WORKS 


FOR 


PUBLIC AND PRIVATE LIBRARIES, 


Pus.isHep By HARPER & BROTHERS, New York. 


G#~ For a full List of Books suitable for Libraries published by Harrer & Broru- 
ERS, see Harper’s CaTaLoaust, which may be had gratuitously on application to 
the publishers personally, or by letter enclosing Ten Cents in postage stamps. 


=~ Harper & Broturrs will send their publications by mail, postage prepaid, on 
receipt of the price. 


MACAULAY’S ENGLAND. The History of England from the Acces- 
sion of James I]. By Tuomas Basinaton Macautay. New Edition, 
from New Electrotype Plates. 5 vols., in a Box, 8vo, Cloth, with Paper 
Labels, Uncut Edges, and Gilt Tops, $10 00; Sheep, $12 50; Half Calf, 
$21 25. Sold only in Sets. Cheap Edition, 5 vols., 12mo, Cloth, $2 50. 


MACAULAY’S MISCELLANEOUS WORKS. The Miscellaneous Works 
of Lord Macaulay. From New Electrotype Piates. 5 vols., in a Box, 
8vo, Cloth, with Paper Labels, Uncut Edges, and Gilt Tops, $10 00; 
Sheep, $12 50; Half Calf, $21 25. Sold only in Sets. 


HUME’S ENGLAND. History of England, from the Invasion of Julius 
Cesar to the Abdication of James II., 1688. By Davin Hume. New 
and Elegant Library Edition, from New Electrotype Plates. 6 vols., in a 
Box, 8vo, Cloth, with Paper Labels, Uncut Edges, and Gilt Tops, $12 00; 
Sheep, $15 00; Half Calf, $25 50. Sold only in Sets. Popular Edition, 
6 vols., in a Box, 12mo, Cloth, $3 00. 


GIBBON’S ROME. The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman 
Empire. By Epwarp Gisson. With Notes by Dean Miiman, M. Gut- 
zoT, and Dr. WitLt1Am SmitH. New Edition, from New Electrotype 
Plates. 6 vols., 8vo, Cloth, with Paper Labels, Uncut Edges, and Gilt 
Tops, $12 00; Sheep, $15 00; Half Calf, $25 50. Sold only in Sets. 
Popular Edition, 6 vols., in a Box, 12mo, Cloth, $3 00. 


HILDRETW’S UNITED STATES. History of the United States. First 
Serres: From the Discovery of the Continent to the Organization of the 
Government under the Federal Constitution. Sxconp Series: From 
the Adoption of the Federal Constitution to the End of the Sixteenth 
Congress. By Ricuarp Hitpreru. Popular.Edition, 6 vols., in a 
Box, 8vo, Cloth, with Paper Labels, Uncut Edges, and Gilt Tops, $12 00; 
Sheep, $15 00; Half Calf, $25 50. Sold only in Sets. 


2 Valuable Works for Public and Private Libraries. 


MOTLEY’S DUTCH REPUBLIC. The Rise of the Dutch Republic. A 
History. By Jonun Loturop Mor ey, LL.D., D.C.L. With a Portrait 
of William of Orange. Cheap Edition, 3 vols., in a Box, 8vo, Cloth, 
with Paper Labels, Uncut Edges, and Gilt Tops, $6 00; Sheep, $7 50; 
Half Calf, $12 75. Sold only in Sets. Original Library Edition, 3 vols., 
8vo, Cloth, $10 50. 


MOTLEY’S UNITED NETHERLANDS. History of the United Nether- 
lands: From the Death of William the Silent to the Twelve Years’ Truce 
—1584-1609. With a full View of the English-Dutch Struggle against 
Spain, and of the Origin and Destruction of the Spanish Armada. By 
Joun Loturor Mottrey, LL.D., D.C.L. Portraits. Cheap Edition, 4 
vols., in a Box, 8vo, Cloth, with Paper Labels, Uncut Edges, and Gilt 
Tops, $8 00; Sheep, $10 00; Half Calf, $17 00. Sold only in Sets. 
Original Library Edition, 4 vols., 8vo,Cloth, $14 00. 


MOTLEY’S JOHN OF BARNEVELD. The Life and Death of John of 
Barneveld, Advocate of Holland. With a View of the Primary Causes 
and Movements of the ‘‘Thirty Years’ War.” By Joun Loruror 
Mortrey, LLD., D.C.L. Illustrated. Cheap Edition, 2 vols., in a Box, 
8vo, Cloth, with Paper Labels, Uncut Edges, and Gilt Tops, $4 00; Sheep, 
$5 00; Half Calf, $8 50. Sold only in Sets. Original Library Edition, 
2 vols., 8vo, Cloth, $7 00. 


GOLDSMITH’S WORKS. The Works of Oliver Goldsmith. Edited by 
Peter CunnincuaM, F.S.A. From New Electrotype Plates. 4 vols., 
8vo, Cloth, Paper Labels, Uncut Edges, and Gilt Tops, $8 00; Sheep, 
$10 00; Half Calf, $17 60. Uniform with the New Library Editions 
of Macaulay, Hume, Gibbon, Motley, and Hildreth. 


GEDDES'S JOHN DE WITT. History of the Administration of John 
De Witt, Grand Pensionary of Holland. By James Gepprs. Vol. 
I.—1623-1654. With a Portrait. 8vo, Cloth, $2 50. 


MULLER’S POLITICAL HISTORY OF RECENT TIMES (1816- 
1875). With Special Reference to Germany. By Witi1am MULLER. 
Translated, with an Appendix covering the Period from 1876 to 1881, by 
the Rey. Joun P. Peters, Ph.D. 12mo, Cloth, $3 00. 


SYMONDS’S SKETCHES AND STUDIES IN SOUTHERN EU- 
ROPE. By Joun Appixeton Symonps. 2 vols., Post 8vo, Cloth, 
$4 00. 

SYMONDS’S GREEK POETS. Studies of the Greek Poets. By Joun 
Appincton Symonps. 2 vols., Square 16mo, Cloth, $3 50. 


Valuable Works for Public and Private Libraries. 3 


TREVELYAN’S LIFE OF MACAULAY. The Life and Letters of Lord 
Macaulay. By his Nephew, G. Orro Trevetyan, M.P. With Portrait 
on Steel. 2 vols., 8vo, Cloth, Uncut Edges and Gilt Tops, $5 00; Sheep, 
$6 00; Half Calf, $9 50. Popular Edition, 2 vols. in one, 12mo, Cloth, 
$1 75. 

TREVELYAN’S LIFE OF FOX. The Early History. of Charles James 
Fox. By Greorer Orro Trevetyan. 8vo, Cloth, Uncut Edges and 
Gilt Tops, $2 50. 

HUDSON'S MISTORY OF JOURNALISM. Journalism in the United 
States, from 1690 to 1872. By Frepreric Hupson. 8vo, Cloth, $5 00; 
Half Calf, $7 25. 


LOSSING’S CYCLOPEDIA OF UNITED STATES HISTORY. From 
the Aboriginal Period to 1876. By B. J. Losstne, LL.D. Illustrated 
by 2 Steel Portraits and over 1000 Engravings. 2 vols., Royal 8vo, Cloth, 
$10 00. (Sold by Subscription only.) 


LOSSING’S FIELD-BOOK OF THE REVOLUTION. Pictorial Vield- 
Book of the Revolution ; or, Illustrations by Pen and Pencil of the History, 
Biography, Scenery, Relics, and ‘Traditions of the War for Independence. 
By Benson J. Lossine. 2 vols., 8vo, Cloth, $14 00; Sheep or Roan, 
$15 00; Half Calf, $18 00. 


LOSSING’S FIELD-BOOK OF THE WAR OF 1812. Pictorial Field- 
Book of the War of 1812; or, Illustrations by Pen and Pencil of the His- 
tory, Biography, Scenery, Relics, and Traditions of the last War for 
American Independence. By Benson J. Lossine. With several hun- 
dred Engravings. 1088 pages, 8vo, Cloth, $7 00; Sheep, $8 50; Half 
Calf, $10 00. | 


PARTON’S CARICATURE. Caricature and Other Comic Art, in All 
Times and Many Lands. By James Parton. 208 Illustrations. 8vo, 
Cloth, Uncut Edges and Gilt Tops, $5 00; Half Calf, $7 25. 


MAIHAFFY’S GREEK LITERATURE. A History of Classical Greek 
Literature. By J. P. Manarry. 2 vols., 12mo, Cloth, $4 00. 


SIMCOX’S LATIN LITERATURE. A History of Latin Literature, 
from Ennius to Boethius. By Grorae AvuGcustus Simcox, M.A. 2 
vols., 12mo, Cloth, $4 00. 


DU CHAILLU’S LAND OF THE MIDNIGHT SUN. Summer and 
Winter Journeys in Sweden, Norway, and Lapland, and Northern Finland. 
By Pact B. Du Cuaitrv. Illustrated. 2 vols., 8vo, Cloth, $7 50; Half 
Calf, $12 00. 


4 Valuable Works for Public and Private Libraries. 


DU CHAILLU’S EQUATORIAL AFRICA. Explorations and Adven- 
tures in Equatorial Africa; with Accounts of the Manners and Customs 
of the People, and of the Chase of the Gorilla, Leopard, Elephant, Hippo- 
potamus, and other Animals. By P. B. Du Cuaitivu. _ Illustrated, 
Svo, Cloth, $5 00; Half Calf, $7 25. 


DU CHAILLU’S ASHANGO LAND. A Journey to Ashango Land, 
and Further Penetration into Equatorial Africa. By P. B. Du CuHainuuv. 
Illustrated. 8vo, Cloth, $5 00; Half Calf, $7 25. 


DEXTER'S CONGREGATIONALISM. The Congregationalism of the 
Last Three Hundred Years, as Seen in its Literature: with Special Ref- 
erence to certain Recondite, Neglected, or Disputed Passages. With a 
Bibliographical Appendix. By IH. M. Dextrer. Large 8yo, Cloth, $6 00. 


STANLEY’S THROUGH THE DARK CONTINENT. Through the 
Dark Continent; or, The Sources of the Nile, Around the Great Lakes of 
Equatorial Africa, and Down the Livingstone River to the Atlantic Ocean, 
149 Illustrations and 10 Maps. By H.M.Sranrtey. 2 vols., 8vo, Cloth, 
$10 00; Half Morocco, $15 00. 


BARTLETT'S FROM EGYPT TO PALESTINE. Through Sinai, the 
Wilderness, and the South Country. Observations of a Journey made 
with Special Reference to the History of the Israelites. By S. C. Barr- 
Lett, D.D. Maps and Illustrations. 8vo, Cloth, $3 50. 


FORSTER’S LIFE OF DEAN SWIFT. The Early Life of Jonathan 
Swift (1667-1711). By Joun Forster. With Portrait. 8vo, Cloth, 
Uncut Edges and Gilt Tops, $2 50. 


GREEN’S ENGLISH PEOPLE. History of the English People. By 
JoHN RicHarD GREEN, M.A. With Maps. 4 vols., 8vo, Cloth, $10 00; 
Sheep, $1200; Half Calf, $19 00. 


GREEN’S MAKING OF ENGLAND. The Making of England. By 
J. R. Green. With Maps. 8vo, Cloth, $2 50. 


GREEN'S CONQUEST OF ENGLAND. The Conquest of England. 
By J. R. Green. With Maps. 8vo, Cloth, $2 50. 

SHORT’S NORTH AMERICANS OF ANTIQUITY. The North 
Americans of Antiquity. Their Origin, Migrations, and Type of Civiliza- 
tion Considered. By Joun T. Suort. Illustrated. 8vo, Cloth, $3 00. 


SQUIER’S PERU. Peru: Incidents of Travel and Exploration in the 
Land of the Incas. By E. Greoree Squirr, M.A., F.S.A., late U. S. 
Commissioner to Peru. With Ilustrations. 8vo, Cloth, $5 00. 


Valuable Works for Public and Private Libraries. 5 


BENJAMIN’S ART IN EUROPE. Contemporary Art in Europe. By 
S. G. W. Bengamin. Illustrated. S8yo, Cloth, $3 50; Half Calf, $5 75. 


BENJAMIN’S ART IN AMERICA. Art in America. By S. G. W. 
BenJamin. Illustrated. 8vo, Cloth, $4 00; Half Calf, $6 25, 


REBER’S HISTORY OF ANCIENT ART. History of Ancient Art. 
By Dr. Franz von Reser. Revised by the Author. Translated and 
Augmented by Joseph Thacher Clarke. With 310 Illustrations and a 
Glossary of Technical Terms. 8vo, Cloth, $3 50. 


ADAMS’S MANUAL OF HISTORICAL LITERATURE. A Manual 
of Historical Literature. Comprising Brief Descriptions of the Most 
Important Histories in English, French, and German. By Professor 
C. K. Apams, 8vo, Cloth, $2 50. 


KINGLAKE’S CRIMEAN WAR. The Invasion of the Crimea: its 
Origin, and an Account of its Progress down to the Death of Lord 
Raglan. By ALEXANDER WILLIAM Kina@uake. With Maps and Plans, 
Four Volumes now ready. 12mo, Cloth, $2 00 per vol. 


MAURY’S PHYSICAL GEOGRAPHY OF THE SEA. The Physical 
Geography of the Sea, and its Meteorology. By M. F. Maury, LL.D. 
8vo, Cloth, $4 00. 


HALLAM’S LITERATURE. Introduction to the Literature of Europe 
during the Fifteenth, Sixteenth, and Seventeenth Centuries. By Henry 
Harram. 2 vols., 8vo, Cloth, $4 00; Sheep, $5 00. 


HALLAM’S MIDDLE AGES. View of the State of Europe during the 
Middle Ages. By H. Hatiam. 8vo, Cloth, $2 00; Sheep, $2 50. 


HALLAM’S CONSTITUTIONAL HISTORY OF ENGLAND. The 
Constitutional History of England, from the Accession of Henry VII. to 
the Death of George II. By Henry Hatiam. 8vo, Cloth, $2 00; 
Sheep, $2 50. 


NEWCOMB'S ASTRONOMY. Popular Astronomy. By Simon New- 
coms, LL.D. With 112 Engravings, and 5 Maps of the Stars. 8vo, 
Cloth, $2 50; School Edition, 12mo, Cloth, $1 30. 


VAN-LENNEP’S BIBLE LANDS. Bible Lands: their Modern Custom. 
and Manners Illustrative of Scripture. By Henry J. Van-LENNEP, 
D.D. 350 Engravings and 2 Colored Maps. 8yvo, Cloth, $5 00; Sheep, 
$6 00; Half Morocco, $8 00. 


GROTE’S HISTORY OF GREECE. 12 vols., 12mo, Cloth, $18 00; 
Sheep, $22 80; Half Calf, $39 00. 


6 Valuable Works for Public and Private Libraries. 


ENGLISH MEN OF LETTERS. Edited by Joun Moriry. The fol- 
lowing volumes are now ready. Others will follow: 

JOHNSON. By L. Stephen. — Grspon. By J. C. Morison. —Scorrt. 
By R. H. Hutton.—Sueititey. By J. A. Symonds.—-GotpsmirH. By 
W. Black.—Humr. By Professor Huxley.—Drror. By W. Minto.— 
Burns. By Principal Shairp.—Spensrr. By R. W. Church.—Tuack- 
gerAY. By A. Trollope.— Burky. By J. Morley.—Mirron. By M. 
Pattison.—SoutHery. By E. Dowden.—Cuaucrer. By A. W. Ward. 
—Bunyan. By J. A. Froude.—Cowrrr. By G. Smith.—Porr. By 
L. Stephen. — Byron. By J. Nichols. —Locxn. By T. Fowler. — 
WorpswortTH. By F..W. H. Myers. — Hawrnorne. By Henry 
James, Jr.—Drypen. By G. Saintsbury.—Lanpor. By S. Colvin. 
—Der Quincey. By D. Masson.—Lamzs. By A. Ainger.—BEntTLry, 
By R. C. Jebb. — Dickens. By A. W. Ward. —Gray. By E. W. 
Gosse.—Swirt. By L. Stephen.—Strerne. By H. D. Traill.—Macav- 
vay. By J. C. Morison.—Fre_pinc. By Austin Dobson.—SHERIDAN. 
By Mrs. Oliphant.—Anppison. By W. J. Courthope.—Bacon. By R. W. 
Church.—Cotmripce. By H. D. Traill. 12mo, Cloth, 75 cts. per vol. 


PRIME’S POTTERY AND PORCELAIN. Pottery and Porcelain of 
All Times and Nations. With Tables of Factory and Artists’ Marks, for 
the Use of Collectors. By Wirt1am C. Prime, LL.D. Illustrated. 
8vo, Cloth, Uncut Edges and Gilt Tops, $7 06; Half Calf, $9 25. (In 
a Box.) 

CESNOLA’S CYPRUS. Cyprus: its Ancient Cities, Tombs, and Tem- 
ples. A Narrative of Researches and Excavations during Ten Years’ Resi- 


dence in that Island. By L. P. pr Cesnoxta. With Portrait, Maps, and 
400 Illustrations. 8vo, Cloth, Extra, Uncut Edges and Gilt Tops, $7 50. 


TENNYSON’S COMPLETE POEMS. The Complete Poetical Works of 
Alfred, Lord Tennyson. With an Introductory Sketch by Anne Thackeray 
Ritchie. With Portraits and Illustrations. 8vo, Cloth. (Jn Press.) 


FLAMMARION’S ATMOSPHERE. Translated from the French of 
CAMILLE FramMarion. With 10 Chromo-Lithographs and 86 Wood- 
cuts. 8vo, Cloth, $6 00; Half Calf, $8 25. 


STRICKLAND’S (Miss) QUEENS OF SCOTLAND. Lives of the 
Queens of Scotland and English Princesses connected with the Regal 
Succession of Great Britain. By Agnes SrricKLanD. 8 vols., 12mo, 
Cloth, $12 00; Half Calf, $26 0c. 


BLAIKIE’S LIFE OF DAVID LIVINGSTONE. Memoir of his Per- 
_ sonal Life, from his Unpublished Journals and Correspondence. By W. 
G. Brarxiz, D.D. With Portrait and Map. 8vo, Cloth, $2 25, 


a ke . 


, ae 


Valuable Works for Public and Private Libraries. 7 


BAKER'S ISMAILIA: a Narrative of the Expedition to Central Africa 
for the Suppression Of the Slave-trade, organized by Ismail, Khedive of 
Kgypt. By Sir Samurt W. Baker. With Maps, Portraits, and Ilustra- . 
tions. 8vo, Cloth, $5 00; Half Calf, $7 25. 


LIVINGSTONE’S SOUTH AFRICA. Missionary Travels and Re- 
searches in South Africa: including a Sketch of Sixteen Years’ Resi- 
dence in the Interior of Africa, and a Journey from the Cape of Good 
Hope to Loanda, on the West Coast; thence across the Continent, down 
the River Zambesi, to the Eastern Ocean. By Davip Livingstone. 
With Portrait, Maps, and Illustrations. 8vo, Cloth, $4 50. 


LIVINGSTONE’S ZAMBESI. Narrative of an Expedition to the Zam- 
besi and its Tributaries, and of the Discovery of the Lakes Shirwa and 
Nyassa, 1858 to 1864. By Davin and CuHaruzs Livineastone. _ Illus- 
trated. 8vo, Cloth, $5 00. 


LIVINGSTONE’S LAST JOURNALS. The Last Journals of David 
Livingstone, in Central Africa, from 1865 to his Death. Continued by 
a Narrative of his Last Moments, obtained from his Faithful Servants 
Chuma and Susi. By Horace Wa tier. With Portrait, Maps, and 
Illustrations. 8vo, Cloth, $5 00; Sheep, $6 00. Cheap Popular Edi- 
tion, 8vo, Cloth, with Map and Illustrations, $2. 50. 


SHAKSPEARE. The Dramatic Works of Shakspeare. With Notes. En- 
gravings. 6 vols., 12mo, Cloth, $9 00. 2 vols., 8vo, Cloth, $4 00; 
Sheep, $5 00. In one vol., 8vo, Sheep, $4 00. 


CURTIS'S LIFE OF BUCHANAN. Life of James Buchanan, Fifteenth 
President of the United States. By Grorce Ticknor Curtis. With 
Two Steel Plate Portraits. 2 vols., 8vo, Cloth, Uncut Edges and Gilt 
Tops, $6 00. 

GENERAL BEAUREGARD’S MILITARY OPERATIONS. The Mili- 
tary Operations of General Beauregard in the War between the States, 
1861 to 1865; including a brief Personal Sketch, and a Narrative of his 
Services in the War with Mexico, 1846 to 1848. By ALrrep Roman, 
formerly Aide-de-Camp on the Staff of General Beauregard. With Por- 
traits, &c. 2 vols., 8vo, Cloth, $7 00; Sheep, $9 00; Half Morocco, 
$11 00; Full Morocco, $15 00. (Sold only by Subscription.) 


GIESELER’S ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. A Text-Book of Church 
History. By Dr. Jonn C. L. Greseter. ‘Translated from the Fourth 
Revised German Edition. Revised and Edited by Rev. Henry B. 
SuirH, D.D. Vols. I., II., II., and IV., 8vo, Cloth, $2 25 each; 
Vol. V., 8vo, Cloth, $3 00. Complete Sets, 5 vols., Sheep, $14 50; 
Half Calf, $23 25. 


8 Valuable Works for Public and Private Libraries. 


ALISON’S HISTORY OF EUROPE. From the Commencement of the 
French Revolution, in 1789, to the Accession of Louis Napoleon, in 1852. 
8 vols., 8vo, Cloth, $16 00. 


NEANDER’S LIFE OF CHRIST. The Life of Christ; in its Historical 
Connection and its Historical Development. By AuGustus NEANDER. 
Translated from the Fourth German Edition by Professors M‘Crintrock 
& BLUMENTHAL, of Dickinson College. 8vo, Cloth, $2 50. 


NORDHOFF’S COMMUNISTIC SOCIETIES OF THE UNITED 
STATES. The Communistic Societies of the United States, from Per- 
sonal Visit and Observation; including Detailed Accounts of the Econo- 
mists, Zoarites, Shakers, the Amana, Oneida, Bethel, Aurora, Icarian, and 
other existing Societies. By Cuartes Norpuorr. Illustrations. 8vo, 
Cloth, $4 00. 


GRIFFIS’S JAPAN. ‘The Mikado’s Empire: Book I. History of Japan, 
from 660 B.C. to 1872 A.D. Book II. Personal Experiences, Observa- 
tions, and Studies in Japan, from 1870 to 1874. By W. E. Grirris. 
Copiously Illustrated. 8vo, Cloth, $4 00; Half Calf, $6 25. 


SMILES’S HISTORY OF THE HUGUENOTS. The Huguenots: their 
Settlements, Churches, and Industries in England and Ireland. By 
SAMUEL SmiLes. With an Appendix relating to the Huguenots in 
America. Crown 8vo, Cloth, $2 00. 


SMILES’S HUGUENOTS AFTER THE REVOCATION. The Hu- 
guenots in France after the Revocation of the Edict of Nantes; with a 
Visit to the Country of the Vaudois. By Samuert Suites. Crown 8yo, 
Cloth, $2 00. 


SMILES’S LIFE OF THE STEPHENSONS. The Life of George Ste- 
phenson, and of his Son, Robert Stephenson; comprising, also, a History 
of the Invention and Introduction of the Railway Locomotive. By Sam- 
UEL SMILES. Illustrated. 8vo, Cloth, $3 00. 


SCHLIEMANN’S ILIOS. _ Ilios, the City and Country of the Trojans. A 
Narrative of the Most Recent Discoveries and Researches made on the 
Plain of Troy. By Dr. Henry Scutremann. Maps, Plans, and Ilustra- 
tions. Imperial 8vo, Hluminated Cloth, $12 00; Half Morocco, $15 00. 


SCHLIEMANN’S TROJA. Troja. Results of the Latest Researches and 
Discoveries on the Site of Homer’s Troy, and in the Heroic Tumuli and 
other Sites, made in the Year 1882, and a Narrative of a Journey in the 
Troad in 1881. By Dr. Henry Scuiiemann. Preface by Professor 
A. H. Sayee. With Woodcuts, Maps, and Plans. 8yvo, Cloth, $7 50. 


4 


Valuable Works for Public and Private Libraries. 9 


SCHWEINFURTH’S HEART OF AFRICA. Three Years’ Travels and 
Adventures in the Unexplored Regions of the Centre of Africa—from 
1868 to 1871. By GrorGe ScuweinFurtTH. ‘Translated by ELLEN 
I. Frewer. Illustrated. 2 vols., 8vo, Cloth, $8 00. 


NORTON’S STUDIES OF CHURCH-BUILDING. Historical Studies 
of Church-Building in the Middle Ages. Venice, Siena, Florence. By 
Cuarves Exiror Norton.  8vo, Cloth, $3 00. 


THE VOYAGE OF THE “CHALLENGER.” The Atlantic: an Ac- 
count of the General Results of the Voyage during 1873, and the Karly 
Part of 1876. By Sir WyvitLy Tuomson, K.C.B., F.R.S. Illustrated. 
2 vols., 8vo, Cloth, $12 00. 


BOSWELL’S JOHNSON. ‘The Life of Samuel Johnson, LL.D., includ- 
ing a Journal of a Tour to the Hebrides. By James Boswetv. Edited 
by J. W. Croker, LL.D., F.R.S. With a Portrait of Boswell. 2 vols., 
8vo, Cloth, $4 00; Sheep, $5 00. 


JOHNSON’S COMPLETE WORKS. The Works of Samuel Johnson, 
LL.D. With an Essay on his Life and Genius, by A. MurpHy. 2 
vols., Syo, Cloth, $4 00; Sheep, $5 00. 


ADDISON’S COMPLETE WORKS. The Works of Joseph Addison, 
embracing the whole of the Spectator. 38 vols., 8vo, Cloth, $6 00. 


OUTLINES OF ANCIENT HISTORY. From the Earliest Times to the 
Fall of the Western Roman Empire, A.D. 476. Embracing the Egyp- 
tians, Chaldeans, Assyrians, Babylonians, Hebrews, Phoenicians, Medes, 
Persians, Greeks, and Romans. By P. V. N. Myers, A.M., President of 
Farmers’ College, Ohio. 12mo, Cloth, $1 75. 


BROUGHAWM’S AUTOBIOGRAPHY. Life and Times of Henry, Lord 
Brougham. Written by Himself. 3 vols., 12mo, Cloth, $6 00. 


BLUNT’S BEDOUIN TRIBES OF THE EUPHRATES. Bedouin 
Tribes of the Euphrates. By Lapy Anne Buiunr. Edited, with a 
Preface and some Account of the Arabs and their eats by W.S. B. 
Map and Sketches by the Author. 8vo, Cloth, $2 


THOMPSON’S PAPACY AND THE CIVIL POWER. The Papacy 
and the Civil Power. By the Hon. R. W. THomrson. Crown 8yo, 
Cloth, $3 00. 

ENGLISH CORRESPONDENCE. Four Centuries of English Letters. 
Selections from the Correspondence of One Hundred and Fifty Writers, 
from the Period of the Paston Letters to the Present Day. Edited by 
W. Barriste Scoones. 12mo, Cloth, $2 00. 


& | . 
‘ 10 Valuable Works for Public and Private Libraries. 


THE POETS AND POETRY OF SCOTLAND: From the Earliest to 
the Present Time. Comprising Characteristic Selections from the Works 
of the more Noteworthy Scottish Poets, with Biographical and Critical 
Notices. By James Grant Witson: With Portraits on Steel. 2 vols., 
8vo, Cloth, $10 00; Gilt Edges, $11 00. 


THE STUDENT'S SERIES. Maps and Illustrations. 12mo, Cloth: 

France.—GIBbon.—GREECE.—ROME (by LippELL).—OLp ‘TEsTa- 
MENT History.—Nrw Testament History.—STRICKLAND’S QUEENS 
oF ENGLAND.—ANCIENT History oF THE East.—Hattam’s Mippir 
AGrS.—ITALLAM’s CONSTITUTIONAL History oF ENGLAND.—LYELL’S 
ELEMENTS OF GEOLOGY.—MERIVALE’S GENERAL History oF RomE.— 
Cox’s GENERAL HIsToRY OF GREECE. — CLASSICAL DICTIONARY. -— 
Sxeat’s ErymMoLocicaL Dictrionary. 1 25 per volume. 

Lewis’s History or GERMANY.—ECCLESIASTICAL HisTorY.—HuUME’s 
Enxeianp. $1 50 per volume. 


BOURNE’S LOCKE. The Life of John Locke. By H. R. Fox Bourne. 
2 vols., 8vo, Cloth, $5 00. 


COLERIDGE'S WORKS. The Complete Works of Samuel Taylor Cole- 
ridge. With an Introductory Essay upon his Philosophical and Theolog- 
ical Opinions. Edited by Professor W. G.T.SHEpp. With Steel Por- 
trait, and an Index. 7 vols., 12mo, Cloth, $2 00 per volume; $12 00 
per set. 


CAMERON’S ACROSS AFRICA. Across Africa. By Verney Loverr 
Cameron. Map and Illustrations. 8vo, Cloth, $5 00. 


BARTH’S NORTH AND CENTRAL AFRICA. Travels and Discov- 
eries in North and Central Africa: being a Journal of an Expedition un- 
dertaken under the Auspices of H.B.M.’s Government, in the Years 
1849-1855. By Henry Barty, Ph.D., D.C.L. Illustrated. 3 vols., 
Svo, Cloth, $12 00. 


THOMSON’S SOUTHERN PALESTINE AND JERUSALEM.  South- 
ern Palestine and Jerusalem. Biblical Illustrations drawn from the Man- 
ners and Customs, the Scenes and Scenery, of the Holy Land. By W. M. 
Tuomson, D.D. 140 Illustrations and Maps. Square 8vo, Cloth, $6 00; 
Sheep, $7 00; Half Morocco, $8 50; Full Morocco, Gilt Edges, $10 00. 


THOMSON’S CENTRAL PALESTINE AND PHCENICIA. Central 
Palestine and Pheenicia. Biblical Illustrations drawn from the Manners 
and Customs, the Scenes and Scenery, of the Holy Land. By W. M. 
Tuomson, D.D. 180 Illustrations and Maps. 8vo, Cloth, $6 00; 
Sheep, $7 00; Half Morocco, $8 50; Full Morocco, $10 00. 


ccs aa tet ianeoae ea 


— Sl 


“aluable Works for Public and Private Libraries. - 11 


DARWIN'S VOYAGE OF A NATURALIST. Voyage of a Naturalist. 
Journal of Researches into the Natural History and Geology of the Coun- 
tries Visited during the Voyage of H.M.S. Beagle round the World. By 
CHARLES Darwin. 2 vols., 12mo, Cloth, $2 00. 


CYCLOPADIA OF BRITISH AND AMERICAN POETRY. Edited 
by Eres SarGent. Royal 8vo, Illuminated Clotlé, Colored Edges, $4 50, 


NICHOLS’S ART EDUCATION. Art Education Applied to Industry, 
By G. W. Nicuoxs. Illustrated. 8vo, Cloth, $4 00; Half Calf, $6 25. 


CARLYLE’S FREDERICK THE GREAT. History of Friedrich IL., 
called Frederick the Great. By THomas Cartyte. Portraits, Maps, 
Plans, &e. 6 vols., 12mo, Cloth, $7 50. 


CARLYLE’S FRENCH REVOLUTION. The French Revolution: a 
History. By THomas Cartyve. 2 vols., 12mo, Cloth, $2 50. 


CARLYLE’S OLIVER CROMWELL. Oliver Cromwell’s Letters and 
Speeches, including the Supplement to the First Edition. With Elucida- 
tions. By Tuomas CartyLe. 2 vols., 12mo, Cloth, $2 50. 


PAST AND PRESENT, CHARTISM, AND SARTOR RESARTUS. 
By Tuomas CariyLe. 12mo, Cloth, $1 25. 


EARLY KINGS OF NORWAY, AND THE PORTRAITS OF JOHN 
KNOX. By Tuomas Cartytre. 12mo, Cloth, $1 25. 


DAVIS'S CARTHAGE. Carthage and her Remains: being an Account 
of the Excavations and Researches on the Site of the Phoenician Metropo- 
lis in Africa and other Adjacent Places. By Dr. N. Davis. _ Illus- 
trated. 8vo, Cloth, $4 00; Half Calf, $6 25. 


BULWER’S LIFE AND LETTERS. Life, Letters, and Literary Re- 
mains of Edward Bulwer, Lord Lytton. By his Son, the Eary or Lyt- 
ton (‘‘Owen Meredith’’). Volume I. Illustrated. 12mo, Cloth, $2 75. 


BULWER’S HORACE. The Odes and Epodes of Horace. A Metrical 
Translation into English. With Introduction and Commentaries. With 
Latin Text from the Editions of Orelli, Macleane, and Yonge. 12mo, 
Cloth, $1 75. 


BULWER’S MISCELLANEOUS WORKS. Miscellaneous Prose Works 
of Edward Bulwer, Lord Lytton. In Two Volumes. 12mo, Cloth, $3 50. 


EATON’S CIVIL SERVICE. Civil Service in Great Britain. A History 
of Abuses and Reforms, and their Bearing upon American Politics. By 
Dorman B. Eaton. Svo, Cloth, $2 50. 


¢ 


12 Taluable Works for Publie and Private Libraries. 


TROLLOPE’S AUTOBIOGRAPHY. An Autobiography. By Anruony 
Trotitope. With a Portrait. 12mo, Cloth, $1 25. 


TROLLOPE’S CICERO. Life of Cicero. By AnrHony Trotiopr, 2 
vols., 12mo, Cloth, $3 00. 


PERRY’S ENGLISH LITERATURE. English Literature in the Eigh- 
teenth Century. By Tuomas Serceant Perry. 12mo, Cloth, $2 00. 


PERRY'S HISTORY OF THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND. A History 
of the English Church, from the Accession of Henry VIII. to the Si- 
lencing of Convocation. By G. G. Perry, M.A. With a Sketch of the 
History of the Protestant Episcopal Church in the United States, by J. 
A. Spencer, 8.T.D. Crown 8vo, Cloth, $2 50. 


ABBOTT’S HISTORY OF THE FRENCH REVOLUTION. ‘The 
French Revolution of 1789, as Viewed in the Light of Republican In- 
stitutions. By Joun S. C. ABrorr. Illustrated. 8vo, Cloth, $5 00; 
Sheep, $5 50; Half Calf, $7 25. 


ABBOTT’S NAPOLEON. The History of Napoleon Bonaparte. By 
Joun 8S. C. Assotr. Maps, Illustrations, and Portraits. 2 vols., 8vo, 
Cloth, $10 00; Sheep, $11 00; Half Calf, $14 50. 


ABBOTT'S NAPOLEON AT ST. HELENA. Napoleon at St. Helena; 
or, Anecdotes and Conversations of the Emperor during the Years of his 
Captivity. Collected from the Memorials of Las Casas, O’Meara, Mon- 
tholon, Antommarchi, and others. By Joun’$. C. Abzort. Illustrated. 
Svo, Cloth, 85 00; Sheep, $5 50; Half Calf, $7 25. 


ABBOTT’S FREDERICK THE GREAT. The History of Frederick the 
Second, called Frederick the Great. By Joun 8. C. Aszorr.  Illustra- 
ted. 8vo, Cloth, $5 00; Half Calf, $7 25. 


M‘CARTHY’S HISTORY OF ENGLAND. A History of Our Own 
Times, from the Accession of Queen Victoria to the General Election of 
1880. By Justin M‘Cartuy. 2 vols., 12mo, Cloth, $2 50. 


WATSON’S MARCUS AURELIUS ANTONINUS. By Paur Bar- 
ron Watson. Crown 8vo, Cloth, $2 50. 


FOLK-LORE OF SHAKESPEARE. By the Rev. T. F. Tutseiton 
Dyer, M.A., Oxon., Author of ‘‘ British Popular Customs, Vast and 
Present,” ete. 8vo, Cloth, $2 50. 


THOMSON’S THE GREAT ARGUMENT. ‘The Great Argument; or, 
Jesus Christ in the Old Testament. By \W. H. Tuomson, M.A., M.D. 
Crown 8yvo0, Cloth, $2 C0. 


Re ee 


_ 


a 


a i 


